Thanks to Werner Schmidlin for this.
Thanks Doug. Best, Di
Censored!
How the Dental profession and the BFS tried
to silence inconvenient evidence.
Doug Cross, 15th June 2009
The futile attempt by the British Fluoridation Society to
censor its main opponents is only the latest incident in its desperate
efforts to silence its critics. But this time they have put their heads
above the fence, and Councils are aware of their tactics.
When the British Government decided to try to expand its
irrational programme of water fluoridation, it knew it faced a problem.
During the last round, back in the early 1990s, Local Authorities had
formed a resistance group, the UK Councils Against Fluoridation, and
wherever the BFS tried to persuade Councils that fluoridation was a
wonderful solution to the appalling state of the teeth of children
living within the Councils' areas - a little bit of blackmail there,
perhaps? - their efforts were thwarted by UKCAF's explanations of
exactly what the fluoride zealots were trying to get them to accept. As
a direct result of UKCAF's involvement, no new fluoridation schemes
have been introduced since.
So if the shiny new scheme to
fluoridate 40% of the country was going to stand a chance to succeed
this time around, it was obviously necessary to silence the Councils.
The first round in this battle was fired in February last year, when
the Chief Dental Officer, Barry Cockcroft, issued 'Guidelines' on water
fluoridation consultation. In them he claimed that 'legal advice to the
Department' was that Council Health Oversight and Scrutiny Committees
were not 'statutory consultees' under the consultation regulations, and
that they therefore had no authority to participate.
This went down with like a lead balloon with
the Councils, and they started to ask difficult questions. One was,
where was UKCAF? So reluctantly we reformed and started providing them
with background information and news about who was doing what, and
where. So angry did the Councils become that the Department of Health
was forced to back off, so it decided to try to beguile Councils into
accepting its pro-fluoridation propaganda. So once again, UKCAF and the
BFS met on the Council Chamber floors.
And the contests really were pathetically
one-sided. The BFS relied on presentation aids that were rigid,
excruciatingly boring, and hopelessly biased, and we wiped the floor
with them every time we met. In the later stages of the contest, people
in the audiences were laughing at the hopeless inability of their
proponents to answer even the most basic questions. Clearly, UKCAF had
become a real threat to their programme.
The BFS had already started to attack the
work of those whom it regarded as its opponents. A couple of years ago
the BFS became alarmed to hear that respected authors who had been
involved in preparing the 'York Review of Water Fluoridation' intended
to publish an opinion piece in the British Medical Journal, calling for
fluoridated water to be regulated under the medicines law. The BFS
considered this so unhelpful that it tried to organise mass opposition
to the article before it was even published.
This was not a wise move, and so angered one
of their correspondents that they passed the BFS's mailing list over to
our side. So now we know who is sympathetic to their extremist views,
and which units of the NHS have been infiltrated. The fact that Mr Andy
Burnham was on that list is not, of course, evidence that he was
involved in this little escapade.
The repeated rejection of the BFS's
presentations by Councils was a serious threat to its ambitions and
those of its backer, the Department of Health. Obviously, something had
to be done to try to silence us, so they hit on the idea of complaining
to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) that it regarded UKCAF's evidence as unacceptable 'marketing advertising'. But the
ASA's refusal to adjudicate on the complaint is insignificant compared
with the concern that has emerged as a result of the BFS's ill-advised
vexatious complaint. The BFS's attempt to suppress UKCAF's evidence
presented has back-fired spectacularly. It is regarded as a blatant
attempt to censor opinions requested by Councils, and has been taken
very seriously by the Centre for Public Scrutiny of the Local
Government Association, the organization that represents every Council
in the country.
In doing so, and without
apparently realizing the implications of its action, it initiated a
challenge to the democratic process of local government in the UK.The
results have been explosive - the saga of our run-in with the ASA has
already been described on our web pages,so suffice it to say that after I warned the ASA that the documents were not within its
remit, and represented a direct threat to the democratic process of
local government, the ASA backed off and refused to consider the BFS's
complaint further.
Had this vexatious challenge
succeeded it would have established a very dangerous precedent. It
would have allowed any special interest group to have opposing evidence
to which they object declared to be misleading advertisements and
suppressed one of the most serious threats to the democratic process of
Local Government for many years.
Their latest foray against us and another
professional scientist who has insisted on publishing 'unhelpful'
commentaries on fluoridation involves burrowing into our personal
records to try to dig up - well, shall we say 'interesting'
information. (I hope you enjoyed examining my CV on the Expert Witness
site, Sheila - but should you have been using NHS facilities at the
time?) But writing sneaky letters to heads of academic institutions
really is not a good way to enhance your own reputations - such as they
are.
So having failed miserably to present their
case using reasoned argument, the BFS now appears to be engaged in
trying to discredit their opposition. Fair enough - but it is, of
course, a waste of time, as we have all moved way beyond their field of
understanding. At a public debate last year I warned one prominent
member of the Society that there were certain aspects of the law that
he needed to be aware of when promoting fluoridated water. More
recently, a colleague of his had an unexpected communication from
lawyers over a BFS presentation to a Local Authority.
But the interminable arguments over bad
teeth and disadvantaged children are out of the main line now, and the
legal obstacles to fluoridation are now firmly in the hands of busy
lawyers. The scientific arguments - especially the exhausted and
discredited mantra of 'it's completely safe and effective', are now a
matter of public ridicule. Can you identify a single person to me, dear
BFS members that you can prove without any doubt has perfect teeth as a
direct result of drinking fluoridated water? These futile arguments
have had their day, and it is now the legal prohibitions that are the
front runners in the fluoridation confrontation.
The old (mainly) men of fluoridation do not
understand the law, their efforts to censor the opposition have been
binned, they have had their day. It's time to retire quietly - the consequences of continuing this futile battle
really could be unfortunate.
-- This Email from: Diana Buckland, Kallangur, Queensland, Australia
VIOLENT BEHAVIOUR AND CRIMINALITY - Adverse health &
Behavior from Silicofluorides http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rmasters/AHABS/summary.html
FLUORIDATION OF COMMUNITY WATER/KIDNEY DISEASE.
http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/gfm663v1
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/kidney/
Fluoride compounds - 3 of the 6 worst air pollutants
http://home.vicnet.net.au/~fluoride/2009%20Final%20Website%20Files/
Aqua%20Pura%20Jan-March%202009.pdf
These are dangerous poisons & the Evidence of Harm in
The scientific, medical, dental & court evidence received in worldwide submissions proving that fluoridation causes disease,
deaths, tooth decay & is useless & environmentally destructive
has been suppressed, buried & denied by Governments & their interests.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/33574
FLUORIDE-GATE cover-up http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/011508/opi_20080115024.shtml
Judge Flaherty’s statement “Proponents of fluoridation are absolutely
right about one thing; there is no real controversy about fluoridation
when the facts are heard by an open mind”. http://www.nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/629FINAL.htm
An example of Fluoride S6 Poison IN YOUR
WATER SUPPLIES http://www.redox.com/msds/data/sosili.html
http://www.waterloowatch.com/Index_files/Fluorosilicate%20Toxicity.pdf
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/Chem_Background/ExSumPDF/
Fluorosilicates.pdf
Massive collusion, corruption & conflicts of interests http://afgen.com/fluoridation.html
Paul Connett's FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK www.fluoridealert.org/ UK COUNCIL AGAINST FLUORIDATION www.ukcaf.org
http://www.ukcaf.org/european_court_ruling_spells_an_end_to_fluoridatio.html QUEENSLANDERS FOR SAFE WATER www.qawf.org
FLUORIDE INFORMATION AUSTRALIA www.dianabuckland.webs.com
GOLD COAST WATERWATCH www.goldcoastwaterwatch.webs.com
CANADA - WATERLOOWATCH http://www.waterloowatch.com/
MCS-GLOBAL - Diana Buckland www.mcs-global.org
James Robert Deal, ATTORNEY, USA http://fluoride-class-action.com & http://fluorideclassaction.wordpress.com PEOPLE'S CLASS ACTION TRUST www.peoplesclassaction.org QUEENSLANDERS SAFE WATER GOLD COAST www.thehealthvine.net
http://www.keepers-of-the-well.org/Highlights_Litigation.pdf Our members review of evidence over the last eleven years,
including animal & human epidemiology studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation & cancer, genetic
damage, neurological impairment & bone pathology. SAY NO TO DRINKING SEWAGE & TOXIC SILICOFLUORIDES
http://www.merilynhaines.org/documents/QAWFbrochure.pdf
http://www.thehealthvine.net/DahlsRecycledWaterReport.pdf
http://www.abpac-australia.com/assets/sevenbarriers.pdf
http://www.abpac-australia.com/assets/notsafewater.pdf
ABPAC fighting for your democratic rights http://www.abpac-australia.com/
Ricardo Johansson ricardo@... Byron Shire Community Coordinator & United People Trustee 0417 489 293 www.willofthepeopleproject.net
www.upworldgov.org Bringing Communities together to strengthen and improve Calling a Global Revolution and an immediate, permanent & irrevocable end to SILICOFLUORIDE (S6/S7poisons) POISONING THE WATER SUPPLIES WITH TOXIC WASTE SOURCED FROM INDUSTRY UNDER THE LONGEST RUNNING FRAUD IN
HISTORY (known as "WATER FLUORIDATION SCHEMES").
|
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
Offline 
Send Email
