Council boss admits there are no funds to fight fluoride plans (From Daily Echo)

Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

They wasted money on the survey then if they're going ahead with it even though 3/4 of people who took part in the survey, point blankely said "NO".

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

And you are a specialist in this science?

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Actually studies in areas where fluoridation has accord, have found that when it's introduced to areas with old lead piping, the fluoride increases the leaching effect and causes higher concentration of heavy metals to get into the water supply, it also causes an increased leaching of chemicals in plastics, chemicals that cause mutations over time as such chemicals mimic hormones such as estrogen, also, saying that no member of the public knows anything about science is like saying no amateur photographers know how to develop their own film, it's just not true.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Actually studies in areas where fluoridation has accord, have found that when it's introduced to areas with old lead piping, the fluoride increases the leaching effect and causes higher concentration of heavy metals to get into the water supply, it also causes an increased leaching of chemicals in plastics, chemicals that cause mutations over time as such chemicals mimic hormones such as estrogen, also, saying that no member of the public knows anything about science is like saying no amateur photographers know how to develop their own film, it's just not true.

I meant occurred, not accord, still trying to wake up, fingers typing faster than my brain.

"Joe public knows nothing about science". What an arrogant comment!
I consider unadulturated water to be a basic human right. I want to be able to choose whether or not I ingest flouride, and for it not to be something over which I have no choice.

Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here!

Tip it in the water please!

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here!

Tip it in the water please!

So bottle fed babies are fed 300+ times more fluoride than breast fed babies? So the populations teeth become discoloured by dental fluorosis? Did you know the human kidneys are only able to remove up to 60% the fluoride we ingest from our bodies and the rest collects in our bones thus causing them to become brittle? Fluoride is a known toxin and it is also classed as medication by the World Heath Organisation? Or that there is no correlation between a decrease in tooth decay and fluoridation? We are already being exposed to a lot of fluoride through dental products, deboned meat, food and drink that is processed with fluoridated water, fruit and veg with residual pesticides on them and the place we as Brits get fluoride from most is TEA.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here!

Tip it in the water please!

So bottle fed babies are fed 300+ times more fluoride than breast fed babies? So the populations teeth become discoloured by dental fluorosis? Did you know the human kidneys are only able to remove up to 60% the fluoride we ingest from our bodies and the rest collects in our bones thus causing them to become brittle? Fluoride is a known toxin and it is also classed as medication by the World Heath Organisation? Or that there is no correlation between a decrease in tooth decay and fluoridation? We are already being exposed to a lot of fluoride through dental products, deboned meat, food and drink that is processed with fluoridated water, fruit and veg with residual pesticides on them and the place we as Brits get fluoride from most is TEA.

I also forgot to mention, a childs kidneys are only able to remove up to 20% of the fluoride a child ingests, those percentages are halved if a person only has one kidney, even worse if they have to be on a dialysis machine.

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here!

Tip it in the water please!

So bottle fed babies are fed 300+ times more fluoride than breast fed babies? So the populations teeth become discoloured by dental fluorosis? Did you know the human kidneys are only able to remove up to 60% the fluoride we ingest from our bodies and the rest collects in our bones thus causing them to become brittle? Fluoride is a known toxin and it is also classed as medication by the World Heath Organisation? Or that there is no correlation between a decrease in tooth decay and fluoridation? We are already being exposed to a lot of fluoride through dental products, deboned meat, food and drink that is processed with fluoridated water, fruit and veg with residual pesticides on them and the place we as Brits get fluoride from most is TEA.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I rest my case

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here! Tip it in the water please!

or just brush your teeth???

elvisimo wrote:

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here! Tip it in the water please!

or just brush your teeth???

I have great teeth and clean them twice a day but i like winding people up

sarfhamton wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

sarfhamton wrote:
Bring it on, I love the anti-fluoride nutters on here!

Tip it in the water please!

So bottle fed babies are fed 300+ times more fluoride than breast fed babies? So the populations teeth become discoloured by dental fluorosis? Did you know the human kidneys are only able to remove up to 60% the fluoride we ingest from our bodies and the rest collects in our bones thus causing them to become brittle? Fluoride is a known toxin and it is also classed as medication by the World Heath Organisation? Or that there is no correlation between a decrease in tooth decay and fluoridation? We are already being exposed to a lot of fluoride through dental products, deboned meat, food and drink that is processed with fluoridated water, fruit and veg with residual pesticides on them and the place we as Brits get fluoride from most is TEA.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I rest my case

Your case that you're an idiot? Yes, we knew that already.

poisoned water ,poisoned skys, chemtrails ,poison food ,gm , why do we stand for this ?

Oh dear, Southampton City Council are short of funds again, this time its 60 pence to put a stamp on a letter to Southampton Water saying "no thank you".

After making pots of money and high salaries and expenses SHA members will walk away without being accountable for poisoning the water supply. I would not be surprised if they turned up in this new quango Public Health England. Who are these **** anyway? how do they get here and how much do they cost to screw up this country with crazy schemes like putting poison in water suoolies.

arthur dalyrimple wrote:
poisoned water ,poisoned skys, chemtrails ,poison food ,gm , why do we stand for this ?

Why do we stand for conspiracy theory mentalists?

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

So the scientists and chemists that are saying flouride is harmful are wrong?

kingnotail wrote:

arthur dalyrimple wrote:
poisoned water ,poisoned skys, chemtrails ,poison food ,gm , why do we stand for this ?

Why do we stand for conspiracy theory mentalists?

They make our lives richer

kingnotail says...
10:07am Mon 7 Jan 13
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change.

....... yep, well I don't need to stick my hand in a fire to know that it's not going to be good for my health...... nor do I need to be in the fire-service either.

Time is now for the Councils that it concern to approach the SWA one at a time, to slow the process down even more, 3 mths it can be done.

hulla baloo wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

So the scientists and chemists that are saying flouride is harmful are wrong?

Fluoride can be very harmful, fatally so at high doses. The doses suggested here are minute in comparison (most toothpastes contain fluoride at levels of ~1000ppm; water fluoridation would be at levels closer to 1ppm). Obviously there are risks with too much being added accidentally, but you could say that for anything that is added to our water e.g brain damage caused by massive release of aluminium salts.

Reverse osmosis system anyone?

The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

http://www.irelandag
ainstfluoridation.or
g/news/

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Instead of wasting money on putting this in the water why not just educate parents and kids on how to brush teeth? If dental hygiene is so bad why not use the money to make people aware you have to eat healthy and reduce sugar intake. It just seems stupid to dump this in the water when a simple bit of education is all it needs. Total overreaction to an issue with a simple solution

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Harmless, unnecessary and expensive.

May as well make a Law to put lettuce in biscuit barrels!

or better still get fluride put in Coca-Cola!

What is the point in voting if the elected authorities are unable to facilitate the majorities will, even if they agree!

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Your trust in people in power is touching, but naive.
Do you seriously believe that this SHA has the public of Southampton as it’s first and foremost concern? Probably not, yet you are prepared to offer them your trust; presumably because they speak with cultured tones and sound like they must know what they are on about. Whilst earning a living in industry I met many of their type; 'Posh and Stupid' was my label for them, they knew it all and because they knew... they would not listen and could not learn from people with experience.
They are supposed to be the custodians of the public good, but yet are stubbornly prepared to waste their paymasters’ scarce resources right to the very end.

Their knowledge of science would appear flawed also, quite apart from their unproven claims on tooth health, 99% of the water tampered with will be used for washing, industry and toilets, what a wasteful way to achieve a goal, which will never get anywhere near the results achieved in Scotland recently of a 67% improvement in children's dental health, by encouraging regular brushing.

If there was anyone with an iota of common sense employed in this SHA that would be the end of any further talk about mass medication with the toxin fluoride.

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote: Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

There you go, that's 5 years of education funding wasted

It could be scientifically proven that its not harmful to tickle your backside with a feather but its probably something you might want to be left down to your choice

You don’t need a PhD in tickling to know that

ColCGE wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Your trust in people in power is touching, but naive.
Do you seriously believe that this SHA has the public of Southampton as it’s first and foremost concern? Probably not, yet you are prepared to offer them your trust; presumably because they speak with cultured tones and sound like they must know what they are on about. Whilst earning a living in industry I met many of their type; 'Posh and Stupid' was my label for them, they knew it all and because they knew... they would not listen and could not learn from people with experience.
They are supposed to be the custodians of the public good, but yet are stubbornly prepared to waste their paymasters’ scarce resources right to the very end.

Their knowledge of science would appear flawed also, quite apart from their unproven claims on tooth health, 99% of the water tampered with will be used for washing, industry and toilets, what a wasteful way to achieve a goal, which will never get anywhere near the results achieved in Scotland recently of a 67% improvement in children's dental health, by encouraging regular brushing.

If there was anyone with an iota of common sense employed in this SHA that would be the end of any further talk about mass medication with the toxin fluoride.

Typical unscientific twaddle, you try to oppose rational argument supported by research with random nonsense plucked out of thin air.

Jesus_02 wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote: Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

There you go, that's 5 years of education funding wasted

It could be scientifically proven that its not harmful to tickle your backside with a feather but its probably something you might want to be left down to your choice

You don’t need a PhD in tickling to know that

I won't even have the argument - your username alone suggests that rational debate is way beyond you.

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Any one of a number of government-funded bodies, paid for mainly through taxation. The results of the research will have been published in peer-reviewed journals after consideration by impartial reviewers.

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

.. a PHd in chemistry seems to have made you an extremely arrogant, opinionated, tunnel-visioned apologist for the fluoride industry.

You know nothing of my qualifications, or indeed my position on this issue.

My position is that topical fluoride application (e.g. in the form of fluoridated toothpaste) should be encouraged. However, I strongly object to the forced systemic ingestion of this industrial toxic waste for the entire population for a number of reasons.

On human rights grounds the forced medication against the will of the individual (and it seems the majority of the population) is intolerable. The effects on the whole body system (rather than just the teeth) have in my opinion been seriously underestimated; and there is voluminous published evidence to this effect. But mainly it deflects financial resources from dental health education efforts which are showing great promise – the Scottish Childsmile results being only the latest showing a consistent improvement in child dental health is being achieved without the chemical intervention of fluoridised water.

Your PhD is NOT any help in solving most of our nation’s social and health problems. Your arrogance seems to be matched only by the local undemocratic SHA.

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

"Even though most people may not want it."

Considering the size of the area affected, and the number of people living within that area, it is a very small minority that have expressed opposition to fluoridation.

The fluoridation intended is an accumulative toxic waste matter dressed up by industry to appear beneficial.

Watch this video as another reminder.

http://articles.merc
ola.com/sites/articl
es/archive/2011/08/0
8/bone-fluorides-mag
net-new-studies-half
life.aspx?e_cid=2011
0808_DNL_art_1

Seems to be a sledgehammer to crack a walnut to me.The whole population have to have chemicals forced down their throats just so a relatively few can have better teeth.Perhaps we could reverse the craze for bottled water and let the people who want flouride in their water buy it in bottles.I like to have a choice of what chemicls I put into my body.

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

Can you identify 'the few here in the UK' that are stopping adding fluoride to water?

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

Can you identify 'the few here in the UK' that are stopping adding fluoride to water?

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

So no, you can't then. The level of fluoride in toothpaste is ~1000ppm, for water fluoridation it would be ~1ppm ie a thousand times less. Do you just make this crap up as you go along?

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

.. a PHd in chemistry seems to have made you an extremely arrogant, opinionated, tunnel-visioned apologist for the fluoride industry.

You know nothing of my qualifications, or indeed my position on this issue.

My position is that topical fluoride application (e.g. in the form of fluoridated toothpaste) should be encouraged. However, I strongly object to the forced systemic ingestion of this industrial toxic waste for the entire population for a number of reasons.

On human rights grounds the forced medication against the will of the individual (and it seems the majority of the population) is intolerable. The effects on the whole body system (rather than just the teeth) have in my opinion been seriously underestimated; and there is voluminous published evidence to this effect. But mainly it deflects financial resources from dental health education efforts which are showing great promise – the Scottish Childsmile results being only the latest showing a consistent improvement in child dental health is being achieved without the chemical intervention of fluoridised water.

Your PhD is NOT any help in solving most of our nation’s social and health problems. Your arrogance seems to be matched only by the local undemocratic SHA.

If arrogant means unwilling to be taken in by anti-scientific mass hysteria, then I'll admit to being arrogant. 'Voluminous published evidence'? Such as?

kingnotail wrote:

Jesus_02 wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote: Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

There you go, that's 5 years of education funding wasted It could be scientifically proven that its not harmful to tickle your backside with a feather but its probably something you might want to be left down to your choice You don’t need a PhD in tickling to know that

I won't even have the argument - your username alone suggests that rational debate is way beyond you.

So what exactly can you assume from my user name?

That I am of South American origin? Are all people with South American beyond reasonable debate? Or am I mealy pointing out that as educated as you may be about Chemistry you are clearly stupid.

Joe public does not require scientific, and statistical reassurance that it’s the vast likeness that they wont be effected. They just don’t want it.

I would just rather decisions that effect me were made by democratic means.

I wouldn’t expect you to understand this as you have a clearly undernourished capacity for politics or ethics, but the will of the public (not the collective knowledge) is being clearly undermined here.

“It is an unquestionable fact that water fluoridation is using untested, unapproved, uncontrolled and unsanitary industrial chemicals to medicate populations in a manner that is illegal and unethical”. This quote is from Declam Waugh’s webpage “The Fraud behind Water Fluoridation”

kingnotail wrote:

ColCGE wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

Your trust in people in power is touching, but naive.
Do you seriously believe that this SHA has the public of Southampton as it’s first and foremost concern? Probably not, yet you are prepared to offer them your trust; presumably because they speak with cultured tones and sound like they must know what they are on about. Whilst earning a living in industry I met many of their type; 'Posh and Stupid' was my label for them, they knew it all and because they knew... they would not listen and could not learn from people with experience.
They are supposed to be the custodians of the public good, but yet are stubbornly prepared to waste their paymasters’ scarce resources right to the very end.

Their knowledge of science would appear flawed also, quite apart from their unproven claims on tooth health, 99% of the water tampered with will be used for washing, industry and toilets, what a wasteful way to achieve a goal, which will never get anywhere near the results achieved in Scotland recently of a 67% improvement in children's dental health, by encouraging regular brushing.

If there was anyone with an iota of common sense employed in this SHA that would be the end of any further talk about mass medication with the toxin fluoride.

Typical unscientific twaddle, you try to oppose rational argument supported by research with random nonsense plucked out of thin air.

Please follow this link to check the accuracy of your allegation concerning "twaddle plucked from thin air"...

And I suppose any sort of a retraction, or admission of twaddle creation - by you - will not be appearing quite soon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-20
842246

Jesus_02 wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

Jesus_02 wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote: Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

There you go, that's 5 years of education funding wasted It could be scientifically proven that its not harmful to tickle your backside with a feather but its probably something you might want to be left down to your choice You don’t need a PhD in tickling to know that

I won't even have the argument - your username alone suggests that rational debate is way beyond you.

So what exactly can you assume from my user name?

That I am of South American origin? Are all people with South American beyond reasonable debate? Or am I mealy pointing out that as educated as you may be about Chemistry you are clearly stupid.

Joe public does not require scientific, and statistical reassurance that it’s the vast likeness that they wont be effected. They just don’t want it.

I would just rather decisions that effect me were made by democratic means.

I wouldn’t expect you to understand this as you have a clearly undernourished capacity for politics or ethics, but the will of the public (not the collective knowledge) is being clearly undermined here.

OK my bad, if you really are of South American origin I apologise.

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

freefinker wrote:

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

.. so, that's what you think, is it Joe Public? You should take your own advice.

PhD in chemistry says I know more than you.

.. a PHd in chemistry seems to have made you an extremely arrogant, opinionated, tunnel-visioned apologist for the fluoride industry.

You know nothing of my qualifications, or indeed my position on this issue.

My position is that topical fluoride application (e.g. in the form of fluoridated toothpaste) should be encouraged. However, I strongly object to the forced systemic ingestion of this industrial toxic waste for the entire population for a number of reasons.

On human rights grounds the forced medication against the will of the individual (and it seems the majority of the population) is intolerable. The effects on the whole body system (rather than just the teeth) have in my opinion been seriously underestimated; and there is voluminous published evidence to this effect. But mainly it deflects financial resources from dental health education efforts which are showing great promise – the Scottish Childsmile results being only the latest showing a consistent improvement in child dental health is being achieved without the chemical intervention of fluoridised water.

Your PhD is NOT any help in solving most of our nation’s social and health problems. Your arrogance seems to be matched only by the local undemocratic SHA.

If arrogant means unwilling to be taken in by anti-scientific mass hysteria, then I'll admit to being arrogant. 'Voluminous published evidence'? Such as?

.. so, nothing to say on the morality or efficacy of forced medication; nothing to say on systemic v topical; nothing to say of the effectiveness of health education.

Just silly statistics like "The level of fluoride in toothpaste is ~1000ppm, for water fluoridation it would be ~1ppm ie a thousand times less.”

Yes, let’s ignore the fact we use a tiny amount of toothpaste and spit almost all of it out. Yes, let’s ignore the fact we consume vastly more water (directly and via cooking) – and only a minuscule fraction of the fluoride it contains ever reaches our teeth. Yes, let’s ignore what happens to that huge fraction that does not reach our teeth. Yes, let’s ignore everything that’s even slightly at odds with our already preconceived opinion.

Are you by any chance a member of the SHA?

kingnotail wrote:
Joe public knows nothing about science, when he does he can have a say on issues like water fluoridation and climate change. Fluoride at this level is harmless (lethal dose of sodium fluoride in man is estimated to be a minimum of 5g), and will have beneficial effect on dental health.

What a terrible assumption !! the public is made up of all sorts of people. Steve Peckham is himself a scientist by profession and acting here as a 'member of the public'. To dismiss the public as not being able to understand or digest the information is frankly arrogant and misguided.

I've always sat on the fence about fluoridisation, BUT if the majority of respondents were against it then it's time they were listened to. Councils also have an opinion as do MPs, they can't all be mistaken!

Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc
ers.org.uk/images/st
ories/news/pdf/0611/
funding_cancer_drugs
_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.
co.uk/society/blog/2
011/jun/09/nhs-refor
ms-live-blog

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc

ers.org.uk/images/st

ories/news/pdf/0611/

funding_cancer_drugs

_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.

co.uk/society/blog/2

011/jun/09/nhs-refor

ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u
k/sph-documents/Fina
l_Head_-_Neck_Profil
es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu
blishing.co.uk/the-e
ffects-of-fluoride-o
n-the-thyroid-gland/

As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Quite simple, if they put it in the water , don't pay your water bill till its stopped !!
The more people abstain from paying the better, remember they r the few we r the plenty x

Perhaps someone would be kind enough to name, and thus shame, the SHA members who intend to impose this chemical upon us.

Imagine a world in which public feeling always trounces professional judgment. Just a thought...

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc


ers.org.uk/images/st


ories/news/pdf/0611/


funding_cancer_drugs


_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.


co.uk/society/blog/2


011/jun/09/nhs-refor


ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u

k/sph-documents/Fina

l_Head_-_Neck_Profil

es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu

blishing.co.uk/the-e

ffects-of-fluoride-o

n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 25%, EU Liver disease down 25%

-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two togther?

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc


ers.org.uk/images/st


ories/news/pdf/0611/


funding_cancer_drugs


_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.


co.uk/society/blog/2


011/jun/09/nhs-refor


ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u

k/sph-documents/Fina

l_Head_-_Neck_Profil

es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu

blishing.co.uk/the-e

ffects-of-fluoride-o

n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 25%, EU Liver disease down 25%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc


ers.org.uk/images/st


ories/news/pdf/0611/


funding_cancer_drugs


_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.


co.uk/society/blog/2


011/jun/09/nhs-refor


ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u

k/sph-documents/Fina

l_Head_-_Neck_Profil

es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu

blishing.co.uk/the-e

ffects-of-fluoride-o

n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Stephen J wrote:
Imagine a world in which public feeling always trounces professional judgment. Just a thought...

.. I take your point, but 'professional judgment’ is by no means unanimous on this issue. There are plenty of dentists, for example, opposed to fluoridisation.

Or take the wisdom of the 'professional judgment' on nvCJD. They were wrong, weren't they?

There is genuine scientific disagreement on this issue and therefore, in my opinion, the application of the Precautionary Principle would be the wisest course to take.

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc



ers.org.uk/images/st



ories/news/pdf/0611/



funding_cancer_drugs



_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.



co.uk/society/blog/2



011/jun/09/nhs-refor



ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u


k/sph-documents/Fina


l_Head_-_Neck_Profil


es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu


blishing.co.uk/the-e


ffects-of-fluoride-o


n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe
ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice
.gov.uk/climate/uk/m
i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea
lert.org/studies/ost
eoid03/

Obviously a Tory backer stands to gain a nice ongoing taxpayers contract supplying fluoride that no one wants and we cannot afford. So we pay councillors to listen to what we want and they ignore us and refuse to prevent this.

Can we not sack them if they cannot do the job they set themselves up for.

I am fed up with this Tory dictatorship,

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

So no, you can't then. The level of fluoride in toothpaste is ~1000ppm, for water fluoridation it would be ~1ppm ie a thousand times less. Do you just make this crap up as you go along?

Why are you leaving out the dots.
toothpaste is 1.100ppm where as water it will be 1.ppm with a 5% +or- verable, or is it a case you need glasses to see the dots.
Check on a box of tooth paste and look at all the stuff that is put in to tooth paste, the bulk of tooth paste is baking soda which makes up 99% of the tooth paste, for children 10 and under it says on the box to use a pea or smaller in size.
Heres a bigger problem once the water flows below a certain speed the drip can not be regulated and so the concitration will go though the roof.

kingnotail - you are an extremely stupid person yourself.!!!! There are no benefits to having industrial waste in the water.

ALL evidence is weak and there is NO justification at all for this illegal poison. Statistics have been twisted beyond belief and you have NEVER done much research or been unlucky to have got fluorosis!!
Even the original technician in the Texas so called trials was not happy that his info. got twisted around.

Evidence was coincidental. that is all!!

There is no medical license for this poison.
There is NO LONG TERM STUDY done at all.

There has never been any research done on the ACCUMULATION of fluoride either.
Many doctors have raised this issue WITH findings and been silenced over it as the medical council don't want their funding from Industries that cause this obnoxious gas in the first place to be axed.

NO one need s a degree to work this out just keep reading and start with the WHO site.

Dont unsult the public we DO know better!!

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Leaving all of the political posturing and point scoring that has become so entrenched in this issue aside, it comes down to this for me.
Should an unelected government agency be allowed to grant itself the power & authority to force Water Companies to insert additives (other than those vital in making the water safe to drink) into the public water system for human consumption?

Personally speaking I don't think that they should be allowed to do this, it is plainly wrong on so many levels.

It wouldn't make any difference to my point of view if they had discovered the 'elixir of life' and were intending to add that to the water supply!

This is really about the most basic of human rights, that should afford every single individual living in access to a clean safe 'non-medicated' water supply.

Correction, that should read as follows.........Leav
ing all of the political posturing and point scoring that has become so entrenched in this issue aside, it comes down to this for me.
Should an unelected government agency be allowed to grant itself the power & authority to force Water Companies to insert additives (other than those vital in making the water safe to drink) into the public water system for human consumption?

Personally speaking I don't think that they should be allowed to do this, it is plainly wrong on so many levels.

It wouldn't make any difference to my point of view if they had discovered the 'elixir of life' and were intending to add that to the water supply!

This is really about the most basic of human rights, that should afford every single individual access to a clean safe 'non-medicated' water supply.

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

.. ah, southy, would this 'natural' river product be Sulfur hexafluoride, SF6; Disulfur decafluoride, S2F10; Sulfur tetrafluoride, SF4; or Sulfur difluoride, SF2?

Just asking, as this seems to be yet another field of your expertise.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

It's difficult for Southy to back up a figment of his imagination with some credible evidence isn't it, so in the absence of that it looks better if the argument is supported by a number of others. The same tactics were employed by Stalin in his 'show trials' where the accused had to present evidence of their innocence which was then dismissed as untrue without requiring any backup. "We'll give him a fair trial before we torture and murder him".

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

So no, you can't then. The level of fluoride in toothpaste is ~1000ppm, for water fluoridation it would be ~1ppm ie a thousand times less. Do you just make this crap up as you go along?

Why are you leaving out the dots.
toothpaste is 1.100ppm where as water it will be 1.ppm with a 5% +or- verable, or is it a case you need glasses to see the dots.
Check on a box of tooth paste and look at all the stuff that is put in to tooth paste, the bulk of tooth paste is baking soda which makes up 99% of the tooth paste, for children 10 and under it says on the box to use a pea or smaller in size.
Heres a bigger problem once the water flows below a certain speed the drip can not be regulated and so the concitration will go though the roof.

I suggest you go check your tube of toothpaste again, douchebag.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

.. ah, kingnotail, you are fairly new here.

southy raison d'être is 'commenting on things knows absolutely nothing about' - and all with the worse possible spelling, punctuation and grammar.

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

In other words you are required to provide all of the evidence I need to prosecute you before I put you on trial. Stalin would be impressed.

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

.. no I didn't. Full stop.

I have NOT posted ANY links, ever, to "what this toxic wastes will do to a body".

It is unfortunate we happen to be on the same side on this issue because you have already brought our arguments into disrepute by your un-researched comments and total lack of scientific credentials.

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

You need to do a lot more research or at lest learn some thing, Yes there is Naturally Occuring Sulfur Fluorides and it gets into your body by what you eat and drink, Sulfur Fluorides are in the soil and rocks all around the world its also in the air that we breath.
SF2, SF4, SF6, S2F10, and S2F2.

"Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable."
When some one comes out with these sort of remarks, it just go's to show case proven because there is no argument agianst it.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

.. no I didn't. Full stop.

I have NOT posted ANY links, ever, to "what this toxic wastes will do to a body".

It is unfortunate we happen to be on the same side on this issue because you have already brought our arguments into disrepute by your un-researched comments and total lack of scientific credentials.

I am refering to it as toxic waste because that what it is that they want to add to the water, you posted links to medical case in the USA where fluoride was added to the water

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

You need to do a lot more research or at lest learn some thing, Yes there is Naturally Occuring Sulfur Fluorides and it gets into your body by what you eat and drink, Sulfur Fluorides are in the soil and rocks all around the world its also in the air that we breath.
SF2, SF4, SF6, S2F10, and S2F2.

"Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable."
When some one comes out with these sort of remarks, it just go's to show case proven because there is no argument agianst it.

.. yep, the first of the year to be entered into my log of your scientific ignorance.

And it's only 08 January.

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

.. no I didn't. Full stop.

I have NOT posted ANY links, ever, to "what this toxic wastes will do to a body".

It is unfortunate we happen to be on the same side on this issue because you have already brought our arguments into disrepute by your un-researched comments and total lack of scientific credentials.

I am refering to it as toxic waste because that what it is that they want to add to the water, you posted links to medical case in the USA where fluoride was added to the water

..NO I DIDN'T.

And you will never be able to demonstrate otherwise.

Freefinker you are one of the few people that likes to post links, people like Torchie just can not debate

southy wrote:
Freefinker you are one of the few people that likes to post links, people like Torchie just can not debate

.. it is VERY rare for me to post links in general debate on this site.

I do, however, post many, many links to prove you wrong - and will continue to do so.

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

.. no I didn't. Full stop.

I have NOT posted ANY links, ever, to "what this toxic wastes will do to a body".

It is unfortunate we happen to be on the same side on this issue because you have already brought our arguments into disrepute by your un-researched comments and total lack of scientific credentials.

I am refering to it as toxic waste because that what it is that they want to add to the water, you posted links to medical case in the USA where fluoride was added to the water

..NO I DIDN'T.

And you will never be able to demonstrate otherwise.

Rare its common with you

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

hulla baloo wrote:

cliffwalker wrote:
The Royal College of Physicians concluded:
“There is now an enormous body of information bearing on the subject of fluoride and health which amply justifies the following conclusions:
1. Fluoride in water added or naturally present at a level of approximately 1ppm over the years of tooth formation reduces dental decay throughout life.
2. There is no evidence that the consumption of water containing approximately 1ppm of fluoride in a temperate climate is associated with any harmful effects, irrespective of the hardness of the water.
3. In comparison with fluoridation, systemic fluoride supplements such as tablets, drops and fluoridated salt have not been shown to be as effective on a community basis.
4. There is no evidence that fluoridation has any harmful effects.”

RECOMMENDATION OF THE COLLEGE:
“The College recommends fluoridation of water supplies in the United Kingdom where the fluoride level is appreciably below 1ppm.”

I know who I'll be paying attention to.

Who paid for their research?

Better still would be to read the reports where they have fluoridated the water, the reports are not good.
There is a difference of natural fluoridation that we recieve though nature and the industral fluoride waste that they need to get rid off, though drinking water and spraying on crop fields.

'The reports are not good' is a bit of a vague statement, could you please supply some supporting references from which you come to this conclusion?

There are plenty coming out of the USA and few here in the UK also, and most of these places that have fluoridated water are brinning it to an end and stopping it all together.
When you brush your teeth, tooth paste has fluoride mix in with it and at a level less than what they intend to put in water, and the reconmendations warning on the box is to spit it out and not to be consumed.
There is tight regulations on how to despose of industral fluoride waste and adding it to tooth paste, field crops spaying and into the water is a cheaper option of getting rid of this waste product.

There are so many reports that poor Southys head is spinning as he decides which one to put forward as evidence of his research. I think he will follow the usual path and fail to produce anything on yet another topic of which he is totally ignorant.

Don't need to produce any thing, just run though back dated Echo bloggs, If I remember rightly even Freefinker posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body, theres is so much of it on the internet you dicide what is real and what is false.
Do your own research and decide don't let others decide for you.

.. please don't bring me into YOUR arguments.

I have NOT 'posted lots of links to what this toxic wastes will do to a body' on this website - even though I do oppose water fluoridisation.

You posted links to cases in the USA in the past. So there for I not brought you into any argument, it was at the same time when I was pointing out how big the area really was and not what the SHA was saying just a small part of Southampton, It was me that pointed out it inclues every one that gets there water from Testwood pumping station, and then after SHA ammitted that the area is as big as i said at the time, i then went on and pointed out the area is much bigger than that because of the connection pipes between the test and itchen pumping stations, it boils down to an area the whole of Southampton and every area out side that as a link connection pipe to the testwood station. An area as far as New Milton to South Romsey, Winchester and Gosport, the whole of this area will be effected by Fluoridation of the water, find this post and you will find your links

.. no I didn't. Full stop.

I have NOT posted ANY links, ever, to "what this toxic wastes will do to a body".

It is unfortunate we happen to be on the same side on this issue because you have already brought our arguments into disrepute by your un-researched comments and total lack of scientific credentials.

I am refering to it as toxic waste because that what it is that they want to add to the water, you posted links to medical case in the USA where fluoride was added to the water

..NO I DIDN'T.

And you will never be able to demonstrate otherwise.

Rare its common with you

Its rare for me to post links

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
Freefinker you are one of the few people that likes to post links, people like Torchie just can not debate

.. it is VERY rare for me to post links in general debate on this site.

I do, however, post many, many links to prove you wrong - and will continue to do so.

Rare its common for you, its rare for me to post links

southy wrote:
Freefinker you are one of the few people that likes to post links, people like Torchie just can not debate

Southy, Aka Pete Wyatt, potential yet completely unelectable representative of TUSC. Once more you have been shown to be completely unreliable, if there is one person on this site who is prone to spout complete nonsense then avoid answering questions, claim inside knowledge, and secret information from the internet and then state that 90% of the internet is false, it is you! Despite many contributors pointing out your complete falsehoods, lies and made up information, you continue to mangle your arguments misread and misquote people with gay abandon.

If your political career and influence over the elector is similar to your input her then you would only get elected as a stalking horse and not as a serious candidate, and I am now getting seriously tempted to come and heckle your stall when you try to get people to join your new world order, as I am sure that once they are aware of you track record for lies, misunderstanding, failure to apologise, provide research or checkable information etc, they would sooner elect Margaret Thatcher’s evil twin.

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

You need to do a lot more research or at lest learn some thing, Yes there is Naturally Occuring Sulfur Fluorides and it gets into your body by what you eat and drink, Sulfur Fluorides are in the soil and rocks all around the world its also in the air that we breath.
SF2, SF4, SF6, S2F10, and S2F2.

"Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable."
When some one comes out with these sort of remarks, it just go's to show case proven because there is no argument agianst it.

Evidence? You wouldn't know what a sulfur fluoride was if it burnt a hole in your arse!

southy wrote:

freefinker wrote:

southy wrote:
Freefinker you are one of the few people that likes to post links, people like Torchie just can not debate

.. it is VERY rare for me to post links in general debate on this site.

I do, however, post many, many links to prove you wrong - and will continue to do so.

Rare its common for you, its rare for me to post links

.. I think you will find, southy, that I know what I post and don't post on this site a lot better than you do.

southy wrote:

kingnotail wrote:

southy wrote:

beiroot wrote:
As an ignorant member of the public ,can I ask if Flouride occurs naturally in the human body? I get occasional headaches can I expect Paracetamol to be put into my drinking water?

Yes it do beiroot, mainly a Sulphur based Fluoride, its a natural and is in very single river and ground water table.

What SHA wants to add is going to be Industral Waste Fluoride, where these Corporations do not want to pay the high cost of disposing there waste by-product in a the right and safe manor like they should do, so they will pay a very little amount to govern bodys like the SHA to dispose of it for them.

Biggest load of crap I've ever heard - there are no naturally occuring sulfur fluorides, and definitely none in the human body. Except for the inert gas SF6, the other known sulfur fluorides would rapidly destroy human tissues. Stop commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about. Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable.

You need to do a lot more research or at lest learn some thing, Yes there is Naturally Occuring Sulfur Fluorides and it gets into your body by what you eat and drink, Sulfur Fluorides are in the soil and rocks all around the world its also in the air that we breath.
SF2, SF4, SF6, S2F10, and S2F2.

"Also, your spelling and grammar are so bad as to render your posts almost unreadable."
When some one comes out with these sort of remarks, it just go's to show case proven because there is no argument agianst it.

All of those except SF6 (an unreactive gas which does not occur in nature, as do none of the other sulfur fluorides) will cause you serious harm, if not kill you. And besides, all except SF6 react rapidly with water to give lovely hydrofluoric acid, which will dissolve your bones and rapidly precipitate the soluble calcium in your body as calcium fluoride, resulting in a heart attack. I've actually used SF4 gas, and I can tell you that stuff is not to be messed with.

You can't ever tell us were you get your 'facts' from as they are pulled at random out of the peanut-sized object you call a brain!

Up until 2006 I had not used Flouride, but was living in Bromley Kent and do not know if they put Flouride in the Water there. I then started using Flouride Toothpaste. From 2003 to 2006 I lived in Southern Spain where trials were being conducted in adding Flouride to the Water, by the time I left in2006, at least two Areas had banned the use of Flouride. In 2010 my Teeth started breaking off and in one year I had lost half my Teeth. I put this down to the use of Flouride, so started using Toothpaste without Flouride in it. Since then I have lost one more tooth. I am at present being fitted with False Teeth. Over the past couple of years I have followed the case of Flouride in the Water supply and concluded that Flouride is a very dangerous Acid based Chemical and note that it has been banned in many Countries including many States in USA and most Countries in Europe. If the SHA does put Flouride in the Drinking Water, I shall be forced at great cost to myself, to start using Bottled Water. I am 76 Years of Age and otherwise in fairly good Health.
Yours Truly, PeterJ Newbey.

There has been – yet again – a great deal of reaction on this issue, I can well understand how anyone would not wish to take the risk (even IF it were only a small risk) of being forced to imbibe something which may ultimately harm them or their family; however ‘Kingnotail’ you appear to be on some sort of a recruitment drive; it is a good thing we are not discussing Thalidomide as I am sure your faith in its science would unshakable. What is your driving ambition in all this?

What greater good are you seeking here? Why do you wish to force your fellow citizens to risk their health? You and your family are already blessed(?) with the ability to imbibe all the fluoride you believe you need. Unless you are part of this obscene miscarriage of power ie a member of the SHA, I find that I am totally at a loss to attribute any meaningful value to your actions.

@kingnotail:

Do you know of any scientifically-valid
ated results of safety tests of fluoride on humans?

If so, could you post the link here?

Thanks.

whats_that_button_fo
r wrote:
@kingnotail:

Do you know of any scientifically-valid

ated results of safety tests of fluoride on humans?

If so, could you post the link here?

Thanks.

http://www.nature.co
m/ebd/journal/v9/n2/
full/6400578a.html

kingnotail wrote:

whats_that_button_fo

r wrote:
@kingnotail:

Do you know of any scientifically-valid


ated results of safety tests of fluoride on humans?

If so, could you post the link here?

Thanks.

http://www.nature.co

m/ebd/journal/v9/n2/

full/6400578a.html

Your link takes one to a dentistry organizations magazine.
I suppose you will not be able to see, but a more suspicious mind might see a conflict of interest here.
Someone recommending a cure for cavities which creates fluorosis, which will be a source of future sales/trade for him.
This is hardly convincing and objective proof to bet ones future healthcare on.
ARE YOU A DENTIST?
It is fairly certain you are NOT a toxicologist.

This journal is a subsidiary of Nature, ie a world-renowned journal and the top UK-based science publication. Where are you getting your information from?

kingnotail wrote:
This journal is a subsidiary of Nature, ie a world-renowned journal and the top UK-based science publication. Where are you getting your information from?

Ah just a subsidiary OK.
For a magazine as prestigious as you seem to believe 'Nature' to be, I would have thought their apparent lack of informative zeal in not making ANY report regarding the Icelandic volcano eruption and its huge contribution to natural fluoride being present over a wide area of Europe, would weaken any argument for them being some sort of independent arbiter on the issue of human consumption of fluoride.

Why do you think they did not report this issue of import. Of course if they did and you can post a link, I will concede this portion of the argument.

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc




ers.org.uk/images/st




ories/news/pdf/0611/




funding_cancer_drugs




_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.




co.uk/society/blog/2




011/jun/09/nhs-refor




ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u



k/sph-documents/Fina



l_Head_-_Neck_Profil



es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu



blishing.co.uk/the-e



ffects-of-fluoride-o



n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe

ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice

.gov.uk/climate/uk/m

i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea

lert.org/studies/ost

eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai
nstfluoridation.blog
spot.co.uk/2013/01/u
nited-communities-of
-southampton.html

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc





ers.org.uk/images/st





ories/news/pdf/0611/





funding_cancer_drugs





_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.





co.uk/society/blog/2





011/jun/09/nhs-refor





ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u




k/sph-documents/Fina




l_Head_-_Neck_Profil




es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu




blishing.co.uk/the-e




ffects-of-fluoride-o




n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe


ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice


.gov.uk/climate/uk/m


i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea


lert.org/studies/ost


eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai

nstfluoridation.blog

spot.co.uk/2013/01/u

nited-communities-of

-southampton.html

Fluoridation X-Files: Cairns Council Votes To Dump Fluoride, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents


-

AFAIK: Australia / Cairns  has been   Fluoridated  since  2009.

-




Cairns council votes to dump fluoride..

Date.January 30, 2013 - 12:14PM.

The Cairns City Council will remove fluoride from its water supply, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents.

But the council says it won't be doing anything to determine if there's broad community support for fluoridation to continue.

"If people want to have access to fluoride, they need to take that up with their dentists," a council spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

"The decision has been made ... it shouldn't be forced on people without consent."

Fluoridation currently cost the council about $300,000 in chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure, he said.

Fluoride will stop being added to the Cairns water supply from the middle of next month.

-


http://www.brisbanet
imes.com.au/queensla
nd/cairns-council-vo
tes-to-dump-fluoride
-20130130-2dk1a.html

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc






ers.org.uk/images/st






ories/news/pdf/0611/






funding_cancer_drugs






_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.






co.uk/society/blog/2






011/jun/09/nhs-refor






ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u





k/sph-documents/Fina





l_Head_-_Neck_Profil





es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu





blishing.co.uk/the-e





ffects-of-fluoride-o





n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe



ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice



.gov.uk/climate/uk/m



i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea



lert.org/studies/ost



eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai


nstfluoridation.blog


spot.co.uk/2013/01/u


nited-communities-of


-southampton.html

Fluoridation X-Files: Cairns Council Votes To Dump Fluoride, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents


-

AFAIK: Australia / Cairns  has been   Fluoridated  since  2009.

-




Cairns council votes to dump fluoride..

Date.January 30, 2013 - 12:14PM.

The Cairns City Council will remove fluoride from its water supply, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents.

But the council says it won't be doing anything to determine if there's broad community support for fluoridation to continue.

"If people want to have access to fluoride, they need to take that up with their dentists," a council spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

"The decision has been made ... it shouldn't be forced on people without consent."

Fluoridation currently cost the council about $300,000 in chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure, he said.

Fluoride will stop being added to the Cairns water supply from the middle of next month.

-


http://www.brisbanet

imes.com.au/queensla

nd/cairns-council-vo

tes-to-dump-fluoride

-20130130-2dk1a.html

Fluoridation X-Files.. Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.

-


THE TEETH OF SOUTHAMPTON'S 5 YEAR OLD'S ARE GENERALLY BETTER THAN THE ENGLAND AVERAGE.

In fact tooth decay in our close neighbors 5 year old's, MILTON KEYNES, Reading & Slough are significantly worse than the England average.

-


www.apho.org.uk/reso
urce/view.aspx?RID=9
5375
-



Here's the killer, MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated... 1.0 to 1.5 mg/f which is above recommended fluoridation levels

-

http://tinyurl.com/b
8m9wh8


-

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc







ers.org.uk/images/st







ories/news/pdf/0611/







funding_cancer_drugs







_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.







co.uk/society/blog/2







011/jun/09/nhs-refor







ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u






k/sph-documents/Fina






l_Head_-_Neck_Profil






es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu






blishing.co.uk/the-e






ffects-of-fluoride-o






n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe




ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice




.gov.uk/climate/uk/m




i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea




lert.org/studies/ost




eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai



nstfluoridation.blog



spot.co.uk/2013/01/u



nited-communities-of



-southampton.html

Fluoridation X-Files: Cairns Council Votes To Dump Fluoride, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents


-

AFAIK: Australia / Cairns  has been   Fluoridated  since  2009.

-




Cairns council votes to dump fluoride..

Date.January 30, 2013 - 12:14PM.

The Cairns City Council will remove fluoride from its water supply, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents.

But the council says it won't be doing anything to determine if there's broad community support for fluoridation to continue.

"If people want to have access to fluoride, they need to take that up with their dentists," a council spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

"The decision has been made ... it shouldn't be forced on people without consent."

Fluoridation currently cost the council about $300,000 in chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure, he said.

Fluoride will stop being added to the Cairns water supply from the middle of next month.

-


http://www.brisbanet


imes.com.au/queensla


nd/cairns-council-vo


tes-to-dump-fluoride


-20130130-2dk1a.html

Fluoridation X-Files.. Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.

-


THE TEETH OF SOUTHAMPTON'S 5 YEAR OLD'S ARE GENERALLY BETTER THAN THE ENGLAND AVERAGE.

In fact tooth decay in our close neighbors 5 year old's, MILTON KEYNES, Reading & Slough are significantly worse than the England average.

-


www.apho.org.uk/reso

urce/view.aspx?RID=9

5375
-



Here's the killer, MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated... 1.0 to 1.5 mg/f which is above recommended fluoridation levels

-

http://tinyurl.com/b

8m9wh8


-

Fluoridation X-Files.. MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than Southampton's.


-

Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.



Naturally Fluoridated MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than SHA's Average.


Southampton's Adult Obesity is Not Significantly different from SHA's Average.


-

www.apho.org.uk/reso
urce/view.aspx?RID=9
5375

-

Please note MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated at 1.0 mg/l to 1.5 mg/l
-

http://tinyurl.com/b
8m9wh8

-



TAP (fluoridated) WATER CAN MAKE YOU FAT, SAY EXPERTS

Jul 11 2004.

By Caroline Wheeler, Sunday Mercury.

Medical experts claim that West Midlands tap water can make people FAT and could be fuelling rising obesity levels.

For the past 40 years, fluoride has been pumped into the region's tap water to help keep teeth healthy.

But now a top doctor claims that the toxin can cause worrying health side-effects including hypothyroidism, a medical dis-order affecting the thyroid gland which controls weight gain.

And he believes that children may be particularly susceptible to obesity if their mums drank fluoridated water while pregnant.

LAST YEAR, THE WEST MIDLANDS TOPPED THE UK 'FAT LIST' WITH A SHOCKING 22.5 PER CENT OF ITS POPULATION CLASSED CLINICALLY OBESE.

Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield said: "There is no doubt that fluoride is enzyme disruptive and one thing it affects is thyroid hormones.

"As a result of this disruption, people can finish up with partial under-activity of the thyroid gland.

"Thyroid problems are becoming more common, particularly in Birmingham, and one of the reasons is because of fluoride in the water."

-


http://tinyurl.com/a
jtcvgm

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:

Dan Soton wrote:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc








ers.org.uk/images/st








ories/news/pdf/0611/








funding_cancer_drugs








_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.








co.uk/society/blog/2








011/jun/09/nhs-refor








ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u







k/sph-documents/Fina







l_Head_-_Neck_Profil







es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu







blishing.co.uk/the-e







ffects-of-fluoride-o







n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe





ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice





.gov.uk/climate/uk/m





i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea





lert.org/studies/ost





eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai




nstfluoridation.blog




spot.co.uk/2013/01/u




nited-communities-of




-southampton.html

Fluoridation X-Files: Cairns Council Votes To Dump Fluoride, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents


-

AFAIK: Australia / Cairns  has been   Fluoridated  since  2009.

-




Cairns council votes to dump fluoride..

Date.January 30, 2013 - 12:14PM.

The Cairns City Council will remove fluoride from its water supply, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents.

But the council says it won't be doing anything to determine if there's broad community support for fluoridation to continue.

"If people want to have access to fluoride, they need to take that up with their dentists," a council spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

"The decision has been made ... it shouldn't be forced on people without consent."

Fluoridation currently cost the council about $300,000 in chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure, he said.

Fluoride will stop being added to the Cairns water supply from the middle of next month.

-


http://www.brisbanet



imes.com.au/queensla



nd/cairns-council-vo



tes-to-dump-fluoride



-20130130-2dk1a.html

Fluoridation X-Files.. Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.

-


THE TEETH OF SOUTHAMPTON'S 5 YEAR OLD'S ARE GENERALLY BETTER THAN THE ENGLAND AVERAGE.

In fact tooth decay in our close neighbors 5 year old's, MILTON KEYNES, Reading & Slough are significantly worse than the England average.

-


www.apho.org.uk/reso


urce/view.aspx?RID=9


5375
-



Here's the killer, MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated... 1.0 to 1.5 mg/f which is above recommended fluoridation levels

-

http://tinyurl.com/b


8m9wh8


-

Fluoridation X-Files.. MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than Southampton's.


-

Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.



Naturally Fluoridated MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than SHA's Average.


Southampton's Adult Obesity is Not Significantly different from SHA's Average.


-

www.apho.org.uk/reso

urce/view.aspx?RID=9

5375

-

Please note MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated at 1.0 mg/l to 1.5 mg/l
-

http://tinyurl.com/b

8m9wh8

-



TAP (fluoridated) WATER CAN MAKE YOU FAT, SAY EXPERTS

Jul 11 2004.

By Caroline Wheeler, Sunday Mercury.

Medical experts claim that West Midlands tap water can make people FAT and could be fuelling rising obesity levels.

For the past 40 years, fluoride has been pumped into the region's tap water to help keep teeth healthy.

But now a top doctor claims that the toxin can cause worrying health side-effects including hypothyroidism, a medical dis-order affecting the thyroid gland which controls weight gain.

And he believes that children may be particularly susceptible to obesity if their mums drank fluoridated water while pregnant.

LAST YEAR, THE WEST MIDLANDS TOPPED THE UK 'FAT LIST' WITH A SHOCKING 22.5 PER CENT OF ITS POPULATION CLASSED CLINICALLY OBESE.

Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield said: "There is no doubt that fluoride is enzyme disruptive and one thing it affects is thyroid hormones.

"As a result of this disruption, people can finish up with partial under-activity of the thyroid gland.

"Thyroid problems are becoming more common, particularly in Birmingham, and one of the reasons is because of fluoride in the water."

-


http://tinyurl.com/a

jtcvgm

Fluoridation X-Files.. MILTON KEYNES has Significantly More Hip fractures in the over-65s than Southampton/England


-

Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.



Naturally Fluoridated MILTON KEYNES has Significantly More Hip fractures in the over-65s than the England Average.


Southampton, the numbers over-65s with hip fractures are not significantly different from the England average.

-

www.apho.org.uk/reso
urce/view.aspx?RID=9
5375

-

Please note MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated at 1.0 mg/l to 1.5 mg/l

-

http://tinyurl.com/b
8m9wh8

-



THE CRIPPLING (FLUORIDE )TOXIN YOU KNOWINGLY CONSUME EVERY DAY...

August 10, 2011

The fact that fluoride can damage your bones, often quite seriously, is no longer in dispute. Just ask the millions of people throughout the world who currently suffer from skeletal fluorosis—a crippling bone disease caused by too much fluoride and marked by irregular bone growth and calcification of the joints.


Of course, it takes a high dose of fluoride to cause crippling fluorosis.

BUT FLUORIDE ACCUMULATES OVER TIME, SO THE SEVERITY OF SKELETAL FLUOROSIS EXISTS ALONG A CONTINUUM, WITH THE EARLIER STAGES PRODUCED BY LOWER DOSES AND MARKED BY MORE SUBTLE SYMPTOMS, SUCH AS JOINT PAIN AND STIFFNESS.

In 2006, skeletal fluorosis was identified by the US National Research Council (NRC) as an adverse effect that needs to be considered by the EPA when lowering the maximum safe level of fluoride in water. While case studies in recent years have documented advanced skeletal fluorosis in the US among high-tea drinkers, the EPA has done no serious analysis of the extent to which the disease may be occurring throughout the country.

-

http://articles.merc
ola.com/sites/articl
es/archive/2011/08/1
0/fluoride-can-damag
e-your-bones.aspx

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:
Fluoridation X-Files.. North-South Cancer Treatment Divide.

-


JMHO..


1) SHA covering up high Cancer death statistics in the Fluoridated Midlands/North East by refusing Cancer suffers in Hampshire, Southampton life saving Cancer treatments.

-



ORIGINAL SOURCE DOCUMENT, FUNDING CANCER DRUGS...

see page 38 to 39

figure 20 reveals a North-South Divide in the approval rates for applications to the cancer drugs fund.


• There appears to be a North-South divide, with SHA's in the South of England approving a lower proportion of applications.

FOR EXAMPLE: NHS South Central approved approximately 75% of applications , this is despite the fact that Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) had a combined Cancer Drugs Fund underspend of £22.5 million


Whereas SHA's North East approved every application received.


-

http://www.rarercanc









ers.org.uk/images/st









ories/news/pdf/0611/









funding_cancer_drugs









_final.pdf


also.

-

http://www.guardian.









co.uk/society/blog/2









011/jun/09/nhs-refor









ms-live-blog

Fluoridation X-Files.. Thyroid Cancer

-


2) We are told by SHA that Fluoride does not raise the risk of Cancer, yet Fluoridated Birmingham Solihull, Arden has the UKs Highest Incidence of Thyroid Cancer.

-


PROFILE OF HEAD AND NECK CANCERS IN ENGLAND: INCIDENCE, MORTALITY AND SURVIVAL.

Trends in the incidence of thyroid gland cancer in England, 1990–2006.

The incidence of thyroid cancer has nearly doubled • in the study period.

East Midland and North of England, the largest Cancer Networks, have as expected the greatest total number of cases.

AGE STANDARDISED RATES (PER 100,000 POPULATION) VARY FROM 3.39 IN ARDEN, TO 1.97 IN SUSSEX.

-

http://www.sph.nhs.u








k/sph-documents/Fina








l_Head_-_Neck_Profil








es_04May2010.pdf



-


DR DURRANT-PEATFIELD MEDICAL ADVISOR TO THYROID UK SAYS..

SUMMARY: Fluorides are highly damaging to the Thyroid Gland, Fluorides are mutagenic, That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body, A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

The extreme sensitivity of the very young (foetus/baby) to fluoride toxicity makes Fluoridation unacceptable.

-


http://www.namastepu








blishing.co.uk/the-e








ffects-of-fluoride-o








n-the-thyroid-gland/

Fluoridation X-Files.. UK Liver disease up 20%, EU Liver disease down 20%


-


3) Nov 2012.. Britain’s chief medical officer, PROFESSOR DAME SALLY DAVIES informed us that deaths in the U.K from liver disease have increased by a fifth between 2000 and 2009, while they have dropped by around the same amount in most comparable European countries.

-

AFAIK: The UK and Ireland are the only two countries in the EU that brew beer using fluoridated water.


It's well known that drinking beer from aluminium kegs/cans is none too healthy for your kidney/liver.


As Ginger_cyclist says.. It's also well known that fluoride has a leaching effect on metals.


A question for Britain’s chief medical officer, Prof, Sally Davies.. can you put two and two together?

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham's under-fives treated for Rickets..



4)... Healthyweight/Overwe






ight Birmingham under-fives treated for Rickets..


Britain’s chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies blames lack of Sunlight, yet Birmingham has up to 1500 HOURS OF SUNSHINE per year... that's 400 HOURS more than the Shetland Islands and only 250 HOURS less than Southampton.

-

http://www.metoffice






.gov.uk/climate/uk/m






i/print.html


High levels of fluoride have repeatedly been found to cause rickets. The relationship was first identified in the 1930s, Birmingham introduced Water Fluoridation in the 1960s.

-

http://www.fluoridea






lert.org/studies/ost






eoid03/

Fluoridation X-Files.. Birmingham Dentists carry out dental extractions on 15 children per day



-

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

-



http://hampshireagai





nstfluoridation.blog





spot.co.uk/2013/01/u





nited-communities-of





-southampton.html

Fluoridation X-Files: Cairns Council Votes To Dump Fluoride, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents


-

AFAIK: Australia / Cairns  has been   Fluoridated  since  2009.

-




Cairns council votes to dump fluoride..

Date.January 30, 2013 - 12:14PM.

The Cairns City Council will remove fluoride from its water supply, saying it amounts to the "involuntary medication" of residents.

But the council says it won't be doing anything to determine if there's broad community support for fluoridation to continue.

"If people want to have access to fluoride, they need to take that up with their dentists," a council spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

"The decision has been made ... it shouldn't be forced on people without consent."

Fluoridation currently cost the council about $300,000 in chemicals, staffing, testing, electricity and infrastructure, he said.

Fluoride will stop being added to the Cairns water supply from the middle of next month.

-


http://www.brisbanet




imes.com.au/queensla




nd/cairns-council-vo




tes-to-dump-fluoride




-20130130-2dk1a.html

Fluoridation X-Files.. Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.

-


THE TEETH OF SOUTHAMPTON'S 5 YEAR OLD'S ARE GENERALLY BETTER THAN THE ENGLAND AVERAGE.

In fact tooth decay in our close neighbors 5 year old's, MILTON KEYNES, Reading & Slough are significantly worse than the England average.

-


www.apho.org.uk/reso



urce/view.aspx?RID=9



5375
-



Here's the killer, MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated... 1.0 to 1.5 mg/f which is above recommended fluoridation levels

-

http://tinyurl.com/b



8m9wh8


-

Fluoridation X-Files.. MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than Southampton's.


-

Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.



Naturally Fluoridated MILTON KEYNES Adult Obesity is Significantly Worse than SHA's Average.


Southampton's Adult Obesity is Not Significantly different from SHA's Average.


-

www.apho.org.uk/reso


urce/view.aspx?RID=9


5375

-

Please note MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated at 1.0 mg/l to 1.5 mg/l
-

http://tinyurl.com/b


8m9wh8

-



TAP (fluoridated) WATER CAN MAKE YOU FAT, SAY EXPERTS

Jul 11 2004.

By Caroline Wheeler, Sunday Mercury.

Medical experts claim that West Midlands tap water can make people FAT and could be fuelling rising obesity levels.

For the past 40 years, fluoride has been pumped into the region's tap water to help keep teeth healthy.

But now a top doctor claims that the toxin can cause worrying health side-effects including hypothyroidism, a medical dis-order affecting the thyroid gland which controls weight gain.

And he believes that children may be particularly susceptible to obesity if their mums drank fluoridated water while pregnant.

LAST YEAR, THE WEST MIDLANDS TOPPED THE UK 'FAT LIST' WITH A SHOCKING 22.5 PER CENT OF ITS POPULATION CLASSED CLINICALLY OBESE.

Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield said: "There is no doubt that fluoride is enzyme disruptive and one thing it affects is thyroid hormones.

"As a result of this disruption, people can finish up with partial under-activity of the thyroid gland.

"Thyroid problems are becoming more common, particularly in Birmingham, and one of the reasons is because of fluoride in the water."

-


http://tinyurl.com/a


jtcvgm

Fluoridation X-Files.. MILTON KEYNES has Significantly More Hip fractures in the over-65s than Southampton/England


-

Going by SHA's own 2010 Indicators.



Naturally Fluoridated MILTON KEYNES has Significantly More Hip fractures in the over-65s than the England Average.


Southampton, the numbers over-65s with hip fractures are not significantly different from the England average.

-

www.apho.org.uk/reso

urce/view.aspx?RID=9

5375

-

Please note MILTON KEYNES is naturally fluoridated at 1.0 mg/l to 1.5 mg/l

-

http://tinyurl.com/b

8m9wh8

-



THE CRIPPLING (FLUORIDE )TOXIN YOU KNOWINGLY CONSUME EVERY DAY...

August 10, 2011

The fact that fluoride can damage your bones, often quite seriously, is no longer in dispute. Just ask the millions of people throughout the world who currently suffer from skeletal fluorosis—a crippling bone disease caused by too much fluoride and marked by irregular bone growth and calcification of the joints.


Of course, it takes a high dose of fluoride to cause crippling fluorosis.

BUT FLUORIDE ACCUMULATES OVER TIME, SO THE SEVERITY OF SKELETAL FLUOROSIS EXISTS ALONG A CONTINUUM, WITH THE EARLIER STAGES PRODUCED BY LOWER DOSES AND MARKED BY MORE SUBTLE SYMPTOMS, SUCH AS JOINT PAIN AND STIFFNESS.

In 2006, skeletal fluorosis was identified by the US National Research Council (NRC) as an adverse effect that needs to be considered by the EPA when lowering the maximum safe level of fluoride in water. While case studies in recent years have documented advanced skeletal fluorosis in the US among high-tea drinkers, the EPA has done no serious analysis of the extent to which the disease may be occurring throughout the country.

-

http://articles.merc

ola.com/sites/articl

es/archive/2011/08/1

0/fluoride-can-damag

e-your-bones.aspx

Fluoridation X-Files.. 60% of all U.S. Children have Dental Fluorosis.. 3% to 4% expected in Southampton?



-

SHA's OWN RESEARCH REVIEW.

The Medical Research Council, when reviewing the York report and taking account of other studies, concluded that a more realistic figure for fluorosis in fluoridated areas within the UK might be between 3% and 4%.

http://tinyurl.com/b
6ewake

-



FLUORIDATION IS NOTHING TO CELEBRATE.

NEW YORK, Jan. 23, 2013.

Fluoride overexposure is a new and GROWING EPIDEMIC AFFLICTING UP TO 60% OF U.S. ADOLESCENTS WITH DENTAL FLUOROSIS (white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted teeth). Early fluoridationists expected that no more than 10% of children would develop mild fluorosis. CDC reports that Black and Mexican-American children suffer significantly higher rates of the more severe forms of dental fluorosis.

Even fluoride varnish, containing 26,600 ppm fluoride, was never safety-tested but is applied to teeth of babies as young as 6-months-old which "leads to a significant increase in urine fluoride."


-

http://www.prnewswir
e.com/news-releases/
fluoridation-is-noth
ing-to-celebrate-188
045531.html