2014 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 2,900 times in 2014. If it were a cable car, it would take about 48 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.


PRESS RELEASE: Australians stand up and take action – mainstream media in Australia will never publish the truth about the cumulative harm from hazardous waste pollutants known as water fluoridation

Australians stand up and take action – mainstream media in Australia will never publish the truth about the cumulative harm from hazardous waste pollutants known as water fluoridation.

Please see this Media Release from Merilyn Haines:


24 July 2014

Australia’s National Medical Research Council (NHMRC) research body has shown its true colours with its’ recent announcement of the  membership of the new NHMRC Fluoride Reference Group (FRG) committee to review water fluoridation’s health effects.
The NHMRC has stacked the fluoride committee with at least nine committee members who have publicly advocated for water fluoridation.
Four of the committee members (dentists Profs John Spencer and Kaye Roberts- Thomson from Adelaide University, Colgate Professor dentist Mike Morgan from Melbourne University and former NSW Chief Dental Officer Clive Wright, now of University of Sydney) are very well known fluoridation activists who have all also received significant funding from the NHMRC, some of which has been to research and promote fluoridation.
An additional five members of the NHMRC committee have also publicly advocated water fluoridation – making fluoridation advocates to be a majority of the 15 member committee.
In late 2013 and again in early 2014 a senior NHMRC executive stated in verbal and written communications that the new committee would contain representatives who were for water fluoridation and also representatives who were opposed to water fluoridation.
Instead, the NHMRC has not allowed one person who is opposed to water fluoridation to be on the committee making a sham of the NHMRC claims that the new review would be fair and transparent.
It is also  now two months since the NHMRC officially appointed the Fluoride Reference Group committee and despite the committee holding its first meeting a month ago, the NHMRC has STILL NOT yet fully  disclosed the committee member’s pecuniary and other interests in fluoride and fluoridation.
The NHMRC have invited the public to submit evidence but the public is just allowed one month from the 23rd July to submit evidence, despite the planned two year review timeline.
 The only evidence the NHMRC will accept from the public are papers published since the 1st October 2006 and then only if they fit the full and almost impossible criteria demanded by the NHMRC.  The post  1st October 2006 limit set by the NHMRC  would preclude the 2006 USA  National Research Council Report Fluoride in Drinking Water and the Bassin study linking water fluoridation to Osteosarcoma in boys which were published in mid 2006 but never  given proper  consideration in the 2007 NHMRC fluoride review.
The NHMRC is supposed to be looking at health effects, but it has said it will refuse case histories medical notes etc.
Merilyn Haines current president of Fluoridation Action Network Australia Inc a Not For Profit assn  opposed to forced fluoridation said today  “The new  NHMRC fluoride review  is looking like it will be  a complete sham. The NHMRC bureaucrats have obviously been taking notes from Yes Minister – the NHMRC are completely pulling the wool over Australian’s eyes.”
“Really, how can anyone ever take the NHMRC seriously again when they descend to using these tactics to protect fluoridation?  “The NHMRC shouldn’t even bother with this total farce of public consultation  – the outcome is already certain and pre- determined  – the NHMRC should save time and money and now just directly proceed to writing up their new review.
We  suggest a title they may like to use  “ Water Fluoridation is Sensationally Safe and Exceptionally Effective “ perhaps with a sub- heading – “ Nothing to see here about Fluoride lowering Children’s  IQ “
 Media contact  M  0418 777 112
NHMRC   Call for evidence on the health effects of water fluoridation
Fluoride Reference Group  NHMRC
Some additional information for you:-
World-feted doctor recklessly promoted fluoridation but refused to produce any evidence of his claimed research into fluoridation.
 Following that statement it gave a list of those who support fluoridation and obviously support Dr William McBride.
The National Health and Medical Research Council
The Australian Medical Association
The Australian Dental Association
The World Health Organization
The Health Commission of New South Wales
The New South Wales State Cancer Council
The Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations
The Federal Director of Health (Dr Howells)
The American Dental and Medical Associations
and many other authoritative bodies.
So here we have a list of those promoting Dr McBride as
Australia’s fluoridation medical expert, but where is the
scientific evidence, the truth of work done on fluorides at
Foundation 41, the “absolute science” accepted and
supported by all Australian Governments, Health Departments,
AMA, ADA and Sydney University Dental Health
Education and Research Foundation.
Dr McBride has been found guilty of scientific fraud.
An example of the Corporate `sponsorship` etc., of our Dental Schools in Universities is (allegedly) like leaving the wolves to mind the lambs.   This is alleged to be most serious conflicts of interests and complete loss of integrity and ethics.

** The Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health,  School of Dentistry, The University of Adelaide.  S.A. http://www.arcpoh.adelaide.edu.au/                ** Same School of Dentistry, The University of Adelaide, S.A. Colgate Australian Clinical Dental Research Centre (CACDRC) http://health.adelaide.edu.au/dentistry/colgate/


Colgate Oral Care and University of Sydney Partnership  – Faculty of Dentistry        










Melbourne University – Colgate










Dictatorship, not democracy, demands Dental Association http://fluoridealert.org/news/dictatorship-not-democracy-demands-dental-association/


NHMRC  still not showing Disclosed interests on the Fluoride Reference Group (as at 24.7.2014)     https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/your-health/health-effects-water-fluoridation/fluoride-reference-group


The National Health Medical Research Council NHMRC   DO NOT DO ORIGINAL RESEARCH INTO FLUORIDATION   – The Fluoridation Fraud

Fluoride Information Australia Website:  http://fluorideinformationaustralia.wordpress.com/fia-report-archives/

The study also found that fluoride does not eliminate tooth decay, citing dietary sugars as the primary cause. People living in areas with fluoridated water and/or using fluoride toothpaste still got dental caries.

Australia wide in dental crisis after widespread fluoridation in every State, first commencing Beaconsfield, Tasmania in 1953 – likewise USA in dental crisis after widespread `fluoridation` first beginning in 1945 Grand Rapids Michigan

The only answer EVER was to provide access to affordable dental health care services for all the population, not the dumping/disposal of hazardous waste pollutants fluorosilicic acid/silicofluorides and co-contaminants of lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, thallium, berrylium, etc., (known as water fluoridation); into our drinking water supplies and hence also the contamination of our food chain and using the populations` kidneys as hazardous waste disposal/filtration units.

This hazardous waste and co-contaminants must not be dumped in the air, rivers, oceans, creeks but dump it in the water supplies as a forced ‘medical /dental treatment’  (without ‘informed consent’ I might add !! )  and it magically becomes safe and effective.

Ingested fluoride is beneficial to dental health.

Please post your comments/rebuttal, on Ken’s post; and here, into the ASWLA comment section. Thank you, ASWLA

Open Parachute

Anti-fluoridation activists work very hard to deny that ingested fluoride has a beneficial role. They take description of the “topical” mechanism that fluoride in saliva plays in inhibiting tooth decay out of context to deny any other role of fluoride. Even then they distort the research to claim fluoride must be applied as toothpaste – it doesn’t. Anything to deny a role for fluoridated water (see Fluoridation – topical confusion  and Topical confusion persists).

But research findings do support a beneficial role of ingested fluoride during teeth development – that is on pre-erupted teeth. This was illustrated again in a recent paper reporting incidence of tooth decay in South Korean children. One group lived in an area where there had been no water fluoridation. The other group in an area where fluoridation had stopped 7 years before.

Cho et al (2014)* found children of age 11, who drank fluoridated water…

View original post 162 more words

Copper (leaching into your pipes) and Fluoride

GENRE: Published Letter

TO:  Daily Mercury; Various email Bcc list


DATE PUBLISHED: 13th January, 2014

TITLE: Copper and Fluoride

STATUS: Published letter
UPDATES:  Please post all updates and comments in the LEAVE A REPLY section below.


Continue reading

Letter sent (unreplied): Diabolical effects of naturally-occurring fluoride

GENRE: Letter

TO:  Daily Mercury Editorial Department; Various email; Bcc list


DATE SENT:   January 21, 2014

TITLE: Diabolical effects of naturally-occurring fluoride

STATUS: No response.

UPDATES:  Please post all updates and comments in the LEAVE A REPLY section below.

Continue reading

Knuckles should, and will be rapped! Admission by NHMRC re: Kidney disease is not included in statistics

GENRE: Response letter from NHMRC

TO:  Aisla B

AUTHOR: Professor John McCallum

DATE SENT:   19th February, 2014

TITLE: NHMRC response to Ailsa B

STATUS: No response required.

UPDATES:  Please post all updates and comments in the LEAVE A REPLY section below.

Continue reading

RE: NHMRC response to Leo Kadia from ACAC 2009

GENRE: Letter Response

TO:  Various email Bcc list

AUTHOR: Dr David Abbott – Executive Director, Health Evidence and Advice Branch

DATE SENT:   19th May 2009; with response given 6th July, 2009 (two months later – they are not very quick at the NHMRC are they?)

TITLE: RE: NHMRC response to Leo Kadia from ACAC 2009

STATUS: No response required.

UPDATES:  Please post all updates and comments in the LEAVE A REPLY section below.

Continue reading

‘Conspiracy’ the Favoured Word of Pro-Fluoridation Extremists

Ongoing debate happening – please add your comments:

For those new to this debate over the fluoridation of water supplies (mandatory or otherwise), it may surprise you to learn that most of the so-called ‘conspiracy theory’ talk comes from the pro-fluoridation lobby, not anti-fluoridation campaigners concerned with presenting the ethical and scientific case against fluoridation.

In fact, the scientific opponents of fluoridation repeatedly reject conspiracy theories regarding the practice (e.g. Connett, Beck & Micklem 2010, p. 85, p. 256), instead choosing to focus their energy on discussing the primary literature and issues such as informed consent to treatment.

However, this does not stop proponents of fluoridation lumping all opponents into the conspiracy theorist category. Sure, there are still plenty of whackos out there who insist on peddling the baseless ‘Nazi’ argument and so forth, but the real question is why do those who promote fluoridation avoid debates (apart from some rare exceptions) with the scientific opponents…

View original post 519 more words

Science Vs. Politics – Australia’s Water Fluoridation Debate

Thank you Kate, for your courage and integrity. Australia: Wake up, take note, independently research; and… fight back.

Real News Australia

As countries around the world continue to ban their water fluoridation programs citing adverse health effects, Journalist Kate Johnston speaks to Independent Politician Mark Aldridge and Independent Film Maker Jaya Drolma, to find out why Australia is lagging behind.

By Kate Johnston

South Australian Independent Candidate and Civil Rights Advocate Mark Aldridge began questioning Australia’s water fluoridation program after encountering some information claiming that the benefits of fluoride on our teeth are largely topical– through application such as toothpaste – rather than systemic.
“I couldn’t understand why we were bathing in it, drinking it, washing our cars in it when studies showed the benefits to be topical,” said Mark.

“You know where it comes from, right?” he asked rhetorically.

I knew, but how many Australians did?

The fluoride added to Australia’s water supply is a toxic waste from the phosphate fertilizer industry – not the pharmaceutical grade, naturally…

View original post 1,085 more words

Legislative Contradictions: Which Act Wins?

Brilliant ! Thank you AFAM ! Poison is Poison. Hiding behind man-made laws won’t mean escape from wrongful actions.. may all these criminals, reap heavily, what they are/have, sown.

The Health (Fluoridation) Act 1973 specifies that, “A water supply authority may and when required by the Secretary shall add fluoride to any public water supply under its control in the manner determined by the Secretary pursuant to this Act for dental health purposes” (1) – the Secretary being the Head of the Department of Health (2).

The legislation also makes clear that “No person has any right of action” against water supply authorities “in respect of anything done in regard to the fluoridation of a public water supply” within the scope of the Act (3).

Put simply, this means one person has the power to selectively order water supply authorities throughout the state of Victoria to fluoridate public water supplies to, ostensibly, treat citizens of Victoria for the disease of dental caries (4); whilst those water supply authorities are not legally accountable for their actions to any citizen…

View original post 489 more words