Request #2 for Dr Foley to debate at Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum 31.01.13


GENRE: Email letterTO: Minister for Health, Federal Minister for Health

AUTHOR: Ailsa B

DATE SENT: Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:15 AM

TITLE: Request #2 for Dr Foley to debate at Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum 31.01.13

STATUS: Awaiting response

UPDATES: Any updates should be posted in the comments section below

Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:15 AM

The Premier the Honourable Campbell Newman MP
Premier@Ministerial.qld.gov.au

The Minister of Health the Honourable Lawrence Springborg MP
Ministerial@Health.qld.gov.au

Bcc  Greg Cary 4BC greg@4bc.com.au; all other Q’ld state MPs; et al

Dear Premier and Minister for Health

Herewith attached is my 2nd request for you to “require” Dr Michael Foley to defend his pro-fluoridation stance, at the Bundaberg Regional Council’s Fluoridation Forum, 31 January 2013.

Within the letter, I elaborate reasons why I consider Dr Foley should defend his position and point my finger at Dr Foley’s power-point presentation, How to fight the fluoridation battle – based on experience from Queensland, Australia,which he delivered at a dental conference in Japan.

Yours truly

Ailsa B

——————***—————–ATTACHED LETTER
Mrs Ailsa B
MACKAY 4741
20 January 2013
The Premier the Honourable Campbell Newman MP
Premier@Ministerial.qld.gov.au

The Minister of Health the Honourable Lawrence Springborg MP

Ministerial@Health.qld.gov.au

Bcc Greg Cary 4BC greg@4bc.com.au et al

Dear Premier and Minister for Health

Re: a) “restricted” link; and b) Dr Michael Foley’s refusal to debate at Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum 31.01.13

a) “Restricted” link
Not unexpectedly, the link provided, in my 16.01.13 letter, which connected with Dr Michael Foley’s fluoridation-promotion presentation at a dental conference in Japan, has been “restricted” since I transmitted my letter to you.

Alternatively, Dr Foley’s power-point presentation can be sourced via this link http://afamildura.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/michael-english-japanese-pptx.pdf .

b) Dr Michael Foley’s refusal to debate at Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum
Herewith, I reiterate my appeal for you to “require” Dr Michael Foley to present his case for fluoridation at the Bundaberg Regional Council’s Fluoridation Forum on 31 January 2013.

Your Brisbane Dental Hospital director said he will not attend the council-run fluoride forum unless “required by his superiors to do so”.

I suspect Dr Foley’s refusal to debate is part of his fluoridation-promotion ploy, which is contained in Slide 44 of his power-point presentation, How to fight the fluoridation battle – based on Experience from Queensland, Australia. Dr Foley delivered this presentation at the 2011 dental conference in Japan, during which time he advised the following:

Slide 44: “Try to avoid debates in public or on radio or TV in which anti-fluoridationists also appear. Taking part in a debate with anti-fluoridationist’s gives them a respectability that they don’t deserve. Anti-fluoridationist’s are always keen to have a public debate since they rely on emotive language rather than science. Their arguments are usually simple, because they’re trying to convince the general public, not scientists. Most of their arguments are wrong, taken out of context, or out of date, but disproving anti-fluoridation claims takes considerably longer than making the claims in the first place, and some degree of doubt from the original claim will often still be left. In any case, even if you win the debate, simply holding a debate reinforces the perception that both sides have equally valid viewpoints. Don’t give them that respectability…”

(Emphasis added. Source http://afamildura.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/michael-english-japanese-pptx.pdf )

Dr Foley’s advice in Slide 44 is un-befitting a professional; it is also a hint that his “proof of safety” does not exist.

A claim of safety for fluoridation is suspect when made in a one-sided “protected public forum” – such as at the pro-fluoridation information evening in Bundaberg, 11.01.13; especially when the claimant then refuses to repeat such a claim in a public forum where a worthy opponent might refute the claim with scientific evidence.

Minister, your continued advocacy for fluoridation does you no credit: it undermines previously- held thoughts of you being a decent person.

You associating, by inference, myself and my colleagues with “wild, weird and wacky information … (that) anyone can be an author and publish …” insults our intelligence and places you in the category of those who seek to denigrate others as a means to achieving their own ends (in this instance, forcing others to chronically ingest a known accumulative, poisonous, industrial-waste product of industry; whose precursor is captured in pollution-control scrubbers to stop it escaping into the environment).

That type of denigration is no better than the religious fanatic who denigrates another’s religion to “enhance” the public perception of their own.

Minister, I challenge you to supply me, within one month, with “irrefutable proof” that fluoridated water is safe for all to consume.

Naming “A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Fluoridation (2007) will not suffice as “irrefutable proof”:

1) The report does not mention fluoride’s effects on those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) even though more than 1.5 million Australians are so blighted, and a study of CKD and fluoride was one of the NHMRC’s tender requirements for the above-mentioned review (fluoride is suspected of accumulating, at about thrice the rate, in those with CKD) yet the Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Fluoridation (2007) made no mention of CKD whatsoever.

2) The 2007 NHMRC review was largely the result of a political request to support a fluoridation launch in Queensland (that’s a story for another day).

3) The report, dismissed in two sentences, the ground-breaking 530-page findings of the 3-year review, by a 12-member scientific team, titled “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards”

The report does not mention fluoride’s effects on those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) even though more than 1.5 million Australians are so blighted, and a study of CKD and fluoride was one of the NHMRC’s tender requirements for the above-mentioned review (fluoride is suspected of accumulating, at about thrice the rate, in those with CKD) yet the Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Fluoridation (2007) made no mention of CKD whatsoever.

The 2007 NHMRC review was largely the result of a political request to support a fluoridation launch in Queensland (that’s a story for another day).

3) The report, dismissed in two sentences, the ground-breaking 530-page findings of the 3-year review, by a 12-member scientific team, titled “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards”

Minister, you are treading in quicksand when you endorse the safety of water fluoridation: the article published in yesterday’s NewMail (19.01.13), in response to Dr Foley’s recently-published claims, was only published after Merilyn Haines produced “indisputable evidence” to support her claims.

The politics of fluoridation are such that it is unlikely that such requirements are made of Drs Foley and Young.

Again, I ask you to “require” Dr Foley to defend his pro-fluoridation claims at the Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum, 31.01.13.

Yours truly

Ailsa B

Advertisements

One comment on “Request #2 for Dr Foley to debate at Bundaberg Council’s Fluoridation Forum 31.01.13

  1. Dr Foley should be forced into a public debate on fluoride by the Qld government. With so much anti fluoride public opinion it is time to voice both sides in a open public forum, the ABC has recently viewed a debate on ‘locking the gate’ gas fracking so the facts are presented, what is he afraid of? This is like a minister not fronting question time in parliament completely undemocratic, unlawful and immoral.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s