The Book Pregnant Earth Mother The Book

Home Page

Known About Fluoride
  Toothpaste Warning
  Upper Intake Level
  Interferes with Brain
  Neurotoxicant

Considerations
  Timing Crucial
  Genetic Factors
  DIY Fluoridation

Revelations
  Amniotic Fluid
  Pharmacy or Faucet?
  Bogus Sales Pitch
  Endorsements
     Smile Survey
     King Fluoride
  Crazy Advice
  Life Decay

Fluoridation 'Science'
  CDC
  EPA
  FDA Fluoride Drugs
  PHS

The Book
  Contents
  Author


Fluoridation Perpetuated by Endorsements, Not Science

The Public Health Service is officially committed to fluoridation.
As its spokesman, the US Surgeon General must endorse fluoridation.

2000 Oral Health Report Card
Endorsed and Promoted by Surgeon General Satcher

The news release put out by Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) School of Dentistry regarding the first national Oral Health Report Card began: "Oregon has nothing to smile about" and quickly pointed out the state got the worst grade for having one of America's lowest percentages of fluoridated water. Then came quotes from three dentists calling for mandatory statewide fluoridation. – OHSU dental school hopes poor report card will be a wake-up call.

The press release failed to mention that the Report Card showed that Oregon kids had the same or lower cavity rates than kids in 19 other states, 14 of which had more water fluoridation.

Something else the 2000 Oral Health Report Card revealed: Oregon also got a high grade for the percentage of people 65 and older who had not lost all their natural teeth. Only Hawaii scored better. And like Oregon, Hawaii also got the worst grade for water fluoridation. But here's how fluoride pushers reported it, waving the Surgeon General flag:

"Dr. Bruce Goldberg, director of Oregon's Department of Human Services, outlined the need: 'Among Oregonians over age 60, 18 percent have lost all their teeth to preventable dental disease. Many of the health problems that result from tooth decay and oral disease can be prevented with water fluoridation.'

"Dr. Goldberg echoed other public health leaders, including the U.S. Surgeon General, declaring the overwhelming evidence to support fluoridation: 'Studies show that individuals living in communities with fluoridated water supplies experience a reduction in tooth decay of 18-40 percent*, with no negative health impacts.' "

– Opinion piece in The Oregonian, April 13, 2007

After the national data revealed no correlation between increased water fluoridation and reduced cavities, this first Oral Health Report Card was taken out of circulation, and subsequent report cards no longer even measured kids' cavity rates – the whole rationale for water fluoridation in the first place.

Surgeon General David Satcher still endorsed the 2000 Report Card, saying its "findings support what we found nationally in the surgeon general's report." (USA Today, Oct. 9, 2000) And despite the lack of correlation between fluoridation and tooth decay, a year later Satcher claimed "community water fluoridation has been the cornerstone of caries prevention in the United States" – his often-cited endorsement/sales pitch.

* Why you should not believe the fluoridation sales pitch

Seven years later: Oregon Fluoridationists were at it again:
Misleading the public about their state's 2007 Smile Survey.

"The fifty-year-old fluoridation hypothesis has not been confirmed. Despite this, millions of people are still medicated with fluoride by government decree, on the assumption that this process has been proved to be entirely safe, and very efficacious in reducing dental caries. In fact, the scientific basis of fluoridation is very unsatisfactory. It is promoted, in the main, by emotion-based 'endorsements' rather than by scientifically-acceptable evidence."

– Fluoridation: a fifty-year-old accepted but unconfirmed hypothesis.
Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ideas (1988)

Endorsements invariably lead back to the US Surgeon General sales pitch:

"Since 1950, Surgeon Generals have committed
their support for community water fluoridation
."

Fluoride promoters like to wave the surgeon-general flag, hoping we will stand up, salute it, and do as they've done: not question authority, especially America's White-Coat-in Chief. But as spokesperson for the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS), the Surgeon General has to endorse (rubber-stamp) water fluoridation.

"PHS has historically been the principal source of funds for fluoride research; but ever since June 1950, PHS has been officially committed to and responsible for promoting fluoridation. Thus, the agency has a fundamental conflict of interest." – Bette Hileman, Voices of opposition have been suppressed since early days of fluoridation

Sidebar in Fluoridation of Water: Questions about health risks and benefits remain after more than 40 years, Chemical & Engineering News, August 1, 1988. (See magazine's pages)

PHS's Fluoridation Irrationale

Chemical & Engineering News. August 1, 1988. p 28. "I now realize that what my colleagues and I were doing was what the history of science shows all professionals do when their pet theory is confronted by disconcerting new evidence: they bend over backwards to explain away the new evidence. They try very hard to keep their theory intact – especially so if their own professional reputations depend on maintaining that theory."

John Colquhoun DDS, PhD
former Principal Dental Officer
of Auckland, New Zealand and
leading proponent turned opponent

"For about 25 years as a dentist I promoted water fluoridation. When I read the research for myself, the evidence was like a knee in the gut. Not only is the research low quality, but numerous vital scientific questions have not been answered. Fluoridation is based on assumptions, not science. My Public Health profession is a pack of sheep, faith-based rather than science-based. Faith, trust and unquestioned loyalty are drilled into us in school. The Public Health profession are like soldiers without a leader and refusing to question policy." – Bill Osmunson DDS, MPH, Director of the Fluoride Action Network