Page 1544 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 27 September 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


There are the facts of the issue. Whether fluoride fixes teeth or not is secondary to this issue. For goodness sake, can members not understand that, if we take something into our bodies that can affect hard tissue, it can also affect bone cells, and it can affect the lymph and the blood that carries that toxin to the bone cells? Of course it can. There have been many researches done on the carcinogenic and other mutagenic effects of fluoride on the population.

Let us look at how effective fluoride is. We have had reports that fluoride is the wonder, the panacea, of the twentieth century. What a load of rubbish. Brisbane, as a non-fluoridated population in Australia, has the same decay rates as Adelaide and Perth, which are fluoridated. Melbourne is worse than Brisbane. Canberra is slightly better. But it has got nothing to do with fluoride. It is to do with socioeconomics and diet. Anybody who suggests otherwise is really not with it. That evidence was produced by an independent person.

Mr Humphries has called for an independent adjudication on this, and I propose to give it. It has been produced. It is in Science magazine. It was just released the other day and I have given everyone a sample of that paper by a Dr Mark Diesendorf. He is not a dentist, he is not a doctor, he is an independent adjudicator. He is a statistician. By using freedom of information - freedom of information, I might add, is the only way one could get hold of this information - he has produced the results of dental cavities as recorded by the dental health departments in the schools across this nation. He is the independent person and he has, in fact, come up with this result, that Brisbane people's teeth are as good as anyone else's in Australia. That is irrefutable. His is an independent judgment on this issue.

There is the answer. I do not know whether holes in teeth are there or not. I am not a dentist. We have dentists who say there are and dentists who say there are not. Then we go to an independent person and we see the results of the dentists themselves being produced as proof that this fluoride, this toxin, which has been put into the water supply and which is poisoning our people, is in fact not working. I will ask the other question. If it is working, why are there now more dentists in Canberra per capita than there were before fluoride was introduced? People have got to be silly if they cannot see the facts of that issue.

Mr Wood: Where is that data?

MR PROWSE: The facts are there.

Mr Stevenson: The dental registry files.

MR PROWSE: Yes. Have a look; the information is available. So why are we having this debate? The point is that people's health is being affected. As a naturopath I


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .