GENRE: Email letter
TO: Tory Shepherd [ Picture ]
AUTHOR: Daniel Z
DATE SENT: 19 October 2010 20:22
TITLE: DZ Response to: ‘THERE’S something lurking in the water. Be afraid, be very afraid”
STATUS: No adequate response.
UPDATES: Any updates should be posted in the comments section below
ATTACHMENT: PDF of original article THERE’S something lurking in the water. Be afraid, be very afraid. by Tory Shepherd.
I had the pleasure of reading your unreferenced article today ( http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/be-afraid-theres-something-lurking-in-the-water/story-fn34ojzj-1225940499668 ).
It’s nice to see that the fluoride lobby and its corporate media lackeys are attempting to be more creative with their insults – ‘attempting’ being the key word (with all that money, one would think they’d be able to afford better writers).
However, being a nice guy, I feel obliged to offer you the opportunity to submit a public retraction. When water fluoridation is finally banned – which is inevitable – your professional image will not be helped by the record showing your embarrassing lack of knowledge about the subject and your willingness to parrot the line of thoroughly discredited ‘authorities’.
Here’s some food for thought to help you out (see comments and links throughout your original text):
THERE’S something lurking in the water. Be afraid, be very afraid. By TORY SHEPHERD
Well, that’s the message from the fluoride conspiracy theorists – with Independent MLC Ann Bressington leading the charge, the first on the beach to sense impending doom.
Actually, the American Dental Association beat Bressington to it:
“We cannot afford to run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances in applying what is at present a doubtful procedure intended to prevent development of dental disfigurements.”
She’s wrong. There is no great danger the authorities are covering up, just the equivalent of a mischievous kid with a cut-out fin strapped to his back.
I guess your definition of ‘serious’ is rather unique. Others seem to have different interpretations of this word. It also seems that you have researched the subject thoroughly – “She’s wrong” – I admire your confidence to dismiss all of Bressington’s concerns with such an unreferenced statement. Since we’re on the subject of dismissing concerns, perhaps you would so kind as to answer the questions put to Victoria’s Chief Health Officer Dr. John Carnie, last year. Unfortunately, Dr. Carnie has thus far been unable to answer them. It would be lovely if you could publicly answer these questions/dismiss the authors’ concerns on Dr. Carnie’s behalf. NB. The authors of these questions and also their follow-up letter.
Water fluoridation has a long and muddied history of facts fighting fraudulence, fear and obfuscation.
You actually got something right. Congratulations! Water fluoridation does have a muddied history of facts fighting fraudulence. You’ve obviously read this book. I like people who read widely. Here’s another book you should read, whenever you have the time. I’m sure you’ll do the public the honour of composing and publishing a full review of the aforementioned book, as soon as you get around to reading it. Your deep insights will, I’m sure, be a valuable contribution to the issue. I’ll be sure to keep an eye out for your review. If you would like to contact the authors for further information, you may like to start with this guy. Apparently, he knows a thing or two about chemistry. Your depth of knowledge may be invaluable for his future publications and those of his co-authors.
On the one side are the conspiracy theories, which are wild enough to rival tales of anal probes from little grey men and Elvis shooting JFK from the grassy knoll.
I understand your frustrations. These conspiracy theorists and their unqualified friends can be so annoying to those such as yourself, who are concerned with real research. It’s so important to be qualified to make such comments. You know, you should find this guy’s email address and tell him the truth – that there’s nothing to worry about and that fluoridation is completely safe and effective and that fluoride must be swallowed to prevent tooth decay. It is important he understands this fact, no matter what the the JADA says. Try this link to contact him via his employer.
Take case in point, Ms Bressington, who told radio station FIVEaa that there was a “cover-up”, that we are “drinking poison in our water”. Not just any poison, but “rat poison” that lowers children’s IQs, mimics or causes ADHD, increases the risk of bone cancer, causes chronic fatigue, “mental dullness” and gut problems. It even rots teeth, she says.
Claims of IQ reduction, claims of cancer risk increases, claims that fluoridation chemicals are actually poisons – even rat poison, gut related problems, and so forth. I mean, where’s the basis for any of this? Crazy stuff. No credible authors at all behind such claims, of course.
“Fluoride is not being added to the water to improve its quality, it’s being . . . used to treat a condition, therefore it is a medication and they are mass medicating and do you know a lot of anti-psychotic drugs have a fluoride base?” she said.
Some would disagree with you, but what the heck would they know, ‘eh?
“So, fluoride actually dulls people and I think it was Bertrand Russell way, way back when he said there will come a time when it will be physically, emotionally and mentally impossible for people to rise up . . . so I will leave you with that.”
FIVEaa’s Leon Byner, who has picked up the campaign with gusto, is also voicing advertisements from Waterways – an SA company who just happen to sell fluoride removal systems for a mere $735.
Waterways tells The Advertiser business has been chugging along quite nicely in the wake of the controversy, thank you very much, with one salesman saying, “Every time Leon gets on about it we sell a few systems”.
Most of what Ms Bressington and other proponents of the the-Government-is-trying-to-sedate-us-all theory are saying is bunkum. Like many conspiracies, it’s an extraordinary melange of bad science mixed with hocus pocus, a few kernels of truth taken out of context and iced over with a dollop of pure nonsense.
Yes, the pro-fluoridation science is much more current and credible.
SA Health offered a rather drab reassurance that the good folk of Mt Gambier would not notice any difference in taste or quality, and that it was a safe and effective public health measure.
They reminded us that the World Health Organisation and the National Health and Medical Research Council endorsed the use of fluoride. Unfortunately, if you believe the New World Order is coming, you probably also believe that these faceless organisations are run by drones who report only to the Grand Poobah.
Perhaps SA Health would care to confirm whether they have followed this advice from the WHO:
“Dental and Public health administrators should be aware of the total fluoride exposure in the population before introducing any additional fluoride programme for caries prevention.”
Since you’re such a great researcher, perhaps you should ask them. Dr. Carnie may also like to have these studies because he’s yet to conduct them in Victoria, even after being publicly reminded to do so. Perhaps the WHO itself could be reminded to contact the Swedish government; evidently, no-one has shown them the science that would change their mind. Maybe the WHO can?
SA Dental Service director Dr Martin Dooland fired up later on radio, sounding clearly frustrated that the same old fairytales were doing the rounds again.
Oh no, please tell him to stop listening to Dr. Carnie. Dr. Carnie has been know to produce magic with his fairytales.
Water fluoridation does not cause cancer or allergies.
Then Dr. Dooland won’t mind preparing a scientific paper countering Dr. Waldbott’s claims. He should refer to the work of Dr. Spittle also. By the way, we’re all still awaiting the Chester Douglass publications defending his handling of the Bassin study. Pity Douglass is now retired.
Yes, too much fluoride can cause fluorosis – white flecking – on the teeth.
Did Dr. Dooland mention that dental fluorosis is not just a cosmetic effect?
Fluoride itself comes in a range of forms and maybe some of those are toxic. But the stuff we’ve been drinking here for decades is fine, and we have better dental health because of it.
What the whole broohaha is masking is what is arguably a more important argument about individual rights. There is a valid ethical debate over whether the Government should be able to put something in the water supply without our consent.
You were really onto some truth there…
But it’s either in there or it’s not and the health benefits of having it outweigh the largely imaginary risks of not having it.
… Until you took the Nazi-like autocratic defense above. Luckily, some still remember that true patriots will always rise up against criminal regimes like the one you and Dr. Dooland serve daily as what those who are truly informed affectionately refer to as, “corporate whores.”
If you’re going to expend energy arguing about the State Government inflicting things unwillingly on the public, there are plenty of better targets for your outrage.
Thanks for the tip, but I’ll stick to water fluoridation one of the easiest frauds to expose (for anyone with half an active brain cell that it). No offense, Tory.
Daniel Z, BA, MA