Page 67 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 12 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
What proponents find very uncomfortable to talk about in the debate on fluoride is that the vast majority of people in the world have better teeth, and yet over 95 per cent of the world's population are not forced to drink artificial and toxic sodium fluoride. That is an absolutely irrefutable argument, which the chairman says there are good reasons for; but he does not give them to you, and does not state the obvious reason that it cannot be fluoride.
We are told that fluoride has caused children's teeth to be better. Indeed, this was the case stated in Sydney. In the 1960s in Sydney it was said that children's teeth got better - improved 62 per cent. Well, is not that terrific? There is an absolute slam-bang case where fluoride worked. What the proponents do not tell you - and when I asked one of the dentists in the inquiry about the case, he said that he did not know about it - is that fluoride was not introduced into Sydney until 1968, after 58 per cent of that 62 per cent improvement had taken place. It also occurred before fluoridated toothpaste was in widespread use.
The case against fluoride is so damning. Only someone who absolutely refuses to look at the evidence, or has some ulterior motive - and there are plenty of them around - would disregard it. It is absolutely incredible. Let us have a look at the most recent case in America. In 1985 the National Institute of Dental Research, perhaps the senior dental body in the world, conducted a study of 39,207 school children from 84 communities throughout America. What did they say? They did not want to say. It was Dr Yiamouyiannis who, under freedom of information, got the evidence from them. What it showed was that fluoride made absolutely no difference whatsoever in the rate of dental caries. They had reduced at the same rate in unfluoridated and fluoridated areas alike.
There was a major inquiry in Quebec that you will never hear about from proponents of fluoride, when 10 scientists studied the world-wide research on fluoride. When talking about the drop in holes in kids' teeth in his submission to the Assembly, Dr Morin said:
For example, the area in our country with the highest incidence of dental decay is a fluoridated area while the best dental status can be observed in a non-fluoridated area.
And yet the chairman said, "Beyond any doubt, its use reduces dental caries". What an absolute nonsense!
Environmental pollution is a major factor of fluoride. Since the turn of the century, fluoride polluters in various industrial manufacturing situations have been sued for untold millions of dollars. (Extension of time granted)
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .