Attn. Mayor Comerford: The Case Against Fluoridation more than mere “opinion”


GENRE: Email letter

TO: Mayor Comerford (Mackay, QLD)

AUTHOR: Daniel Z

DATE SENT: Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 6:29 PM

TITLE: Attn. Mayor Comerford: The Case Against Fluoridation more than mere “opinion”

STATUS: Awaiting response

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

to:  deirdre.comerford@mackay.qld.gov.au
cc:  alison.jones@mackay.qld.gov.au,
david.perkins@mackay.qld.gov.au,
frank.gilbert@mackay.qld.gov.au,
greg.martin@mackay.qld.gov.au,
kevin.casey@mackay.qld.gov.au,
laurence.bonaventura@mackay.qld.gov.au,
paul.steindl@mackay.qld.gov.au,
ross.walker@mackay.qld.gov.au,
theresa.morgan@mackay.qld.gov.au

Dear Mayor Comerford,

I refer you to this video: http://www.dailymercury.com.au/videos/discussions-fluoride/17305/ – For future reference, “opinions” against fluoridation are more than mere “opinions.” For instance, consider the following words from Professor CV Howard, of the School of Biomedical Sciences at the University of Ulster:

“The authors have produced a well-researched, cogently argued, and very readable text [ http://www.chelseagreen.com/bookstore/item/the_case_against_fluoride ] that summarises historical, political, ethical, toxicological, and epidemiological scientific data behind drinking water fluoridation… The text is approachable by non-scientists and specialists, although an extensive technical bibliography is provided for those who wish to delve deeper… After reading this book, one is left with the strong impression that water fluoridation is an idea that is well past its ‘sell by date’ and that it should be rapidly phased out. What is now clear is that, if proposed today, fluoridation of drinking water to prevent tooth decay would stand virtually no chance of being adopted, given the current status of scientific knowledge.” [ http://www.fluorideresearch.org/433/files/FJ2010_v43_n3_p170-173.pdf ]

The danger of assuming genuine arguments are mere “opinions,” robs your community of exposure to the true, damning and extensive case that has been made against fluoridation by numerous scientists. In fact, there are only two “opinions” that should rightly be categorised as such:

1. Fluoridation is “safe.”
2. Fluoridation is “effective.”

Neither of these “opinions” are based on solid evidence. Read the book cited above and you’ll quickly understand this to be the case.

Sincerely,

Daniel Z

Advertisements

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