"Councillors have a responsibility to uphold the basic Human Rights of the people they represent to choose what medication they and their family wish to take, and not have it enforced through their water supply."
(Councillor Adrian Underwood, South Ribble District Council,
First Chairman of North West Councils Against Fluoridation, !989)
5th September 2013
Water fluoridation - the 'weapons' connection!
The panicky claim that ‘a chemical weapon’ (sodium fluoride) is put into public water supplies’
may be the latest 'Silly Season' myth
- but there’s more to it than just rumour.
It's all gone viral! Hysterical reports are flooding the virtual world with the sensational news that the British government issued export licences to supply 'a chemical weapon', sodium fluoride, to the evil Assad regime in Syria. And this was even whilst Assad was actually engaged in a civil war against his own people.
The most excitable newspapers, clearly a little short of educated science writers and having just discovered that the same chemical is considered indispensible in dental products, are now even screaming that 'Syria is using toothpaste to make chemical weapons!'
Now, with the confrontation building in the Middle East, between America on one side and Russia and China on the other, the propaganda war is really hotting up. Today, The Voice of Russia earnestly assures its readers that "Syria's 'chemical weapon' is regularly dumped into US municipal water!' - wonderful, wonderful stuff!
And of course it's all utter bunk - of course sodium fluoride is not a 'chemical weapon'. Any first year chemistry undergraduate could have put these frantic media morons right on that.
But before you shrug it all off as just another 'Silly Season' media feeding frenzy, a storm in a teacup, just take a closer look at this fabulous fiction: there really is something rather nasty about the chemicals that rogue governments (and that includes ours) DO put in their water supply.
Sodium fluoride may not go into British water, but the fanatics devoted to the fluoride religion are now trying to sneak exactly that substance into children's school milk in Blackpool - and at five times the concentration they've managed to get it into drinking water.
But don't think it ends there - the fluorosilicic acid that actually IS put into English water (the Welsh and Scots aren't so stupid) has much greater potential for antisocial use - more, that is, than at present, anyway.
This corrosive, fuming, lethal chemical is perfectly capable of being used directly as a weapon. There are other ways to use this chemical than just pouring it into the water supply, and both the bad guys and the security services are well aware of this.
Unlike our laid-back complacent Parliament of Fools, who still think it's OK to contaminate our water and food with this stuff, some of our American cousins are not so laid back. They insist that armed escorts accompany tankers of this lethal chemical when it's being delivered to the few water treatment works that do use it.
So take a glance at how the latest urban myth-in-the-making got started. The crazies and not-so-crazies out there who think toothpaste is a weapon of mass (dental?) destruction may not be quite so far off the mark as you might be led to suppose. Download our own take on this story and sit back for a little light entertainment. Well, perhaps not entirely quite so 'light' after all.
So don't get too relaxed about this entertaining myth.
Fluorosilicic acid could be coming to a neighbourhood near you
- and not just in the water supply, either!
CLICK HERE for the full report!
Israeli Sureme Court has NOT banned
The media are having a Fluoride Feeding Frenzy! "The Israeli Supreme Court has banned all fluoridation of the State's water supplies!" they shriek. Emails pour in from excitable Friends, Twitter and Facebook are awash with deranged predictions of the end of fluoridation, everywhere, really. Credit for persuading the highest Court in that turbulent land, about all of the terrible things that fluoride does to the human body, is grabbed by Wannabees, looking for glory.
And it's all one big fairy story, hype, misinterpretation, a glorious example of the Silly Season at its uproarious best. For the bad news is that the Supreme Court made no such ruling. It didn't happen - in fact the hearing was abandoned.
The Petition had become 'exhausted', overtaken by events, dead, defunct - in fact, the proverbial Monty Python Dead Parrot. We're seeing the birth and self-inflation of the latest 'urban myth' in the making. Once again the media (and others) have rushed in where more cautious commentators would reccommend restraint and a little more research.
You don't believe me? OK - read what the real experts in Israel told me only yesterday - the guys who have been at the sharp end of this Petition, and were there when it all went down. Yeah, yeah - it may happen there, one day - but not through any fancied 'ruling' from this prematurely terminated hearing. The only 'ruling' was that the State and Minister for Health had to pay the Petitioner's costs! (See that happening here?)
So read what's really going down there, behind the media hype and hysteria. There are hidden pressures at work behind Israel's reluctant move towards getting rid of this embarassing practice, and there's much more at stake here than children's teeth.
FLUORIDATION IN ENGLAND -
The minimum sentence is now increased
to 20 years, without reprieve.
Whilst Councils flutter around the question of what they are expected to do now that 'responsibility for public health' has been foisted onto their uncomprehending heads, our lovable 'Sir Humphreys' in the English Civil Service have pulled off a stunt of unprecedented audacity.
Passing 'secondary legislation' - that's the nitty-gritty detail that doesn't have to be ratified (or even seen) by Parliament - on the management of new fluoridation projects, they have decreed that once a new fluoridation scheme is implemented, it shall carry on FOR AT LEAST 20 YEARS.
And don't imagine that you, your Councillors, or anyone at all, can challenge it during that sentence. For the new Water Fluoridation (Proposals and Consultation) (England) Regulations 2013 have been specifically designed to obstruct all legal challenges during that period - and that applies even if rock solid evidence is discovered that fluoridation does not work and/or is harmful.
So if your kids get damaged, that's tough! They'll be condemned to a minimum of twenty years without reprieve, even if they've done nothing criminal themselves.
And this is all aimed at providing those nice cuddly Water Companies with confidence that they won't have to worry about the inconvenience of having to shut up the fluoride shop before the 20 year sinecure expires.
And you thought that the Department of Health had your best interests at heart all along? Wake up to Big Brother's Britain - this is what those complicated changes to the law have been aiming for all along. Did you really think that it's almost over, here in this famous bastion of democracy? Welcome to the Alice in Wonderland world of public health policy making!
Move to fluoridate Southampton’s water supply
in disarray - for the present.
26th July 2013
The fluoridation ‘request’ by South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA) to Southern Water, that would have forced the company to add fluoride to the water for the City of Southampton, was not formally signed as a contract. So, as the situation appears to stand at present, Southern Water cannot be made to add fluoride to its product,
But just how significant is this latest development in the continuing travesty of ‘public health’, for Southampton and for the rest of the country?
A very British cover-up
25th June 2013
We are surrounded by politicans who appear to have little or no scruples when it comes to acting with honour and decency. We have all watched with contempt the wriggling of executives accused of incompetence and negligence in the British National Health Service.
We learn with disgust of attempts by undercover police officers to collect dirt on the family of mudered Stephen Lawrence. And we watch with disgust, tinged perhaps with amusement, the revelation of the obsessive intrusion into our personal privacy by the British and American Security Services, apparently listening to and recording our every private thought, word and activity on the Internet.
This pervasive lack of morality and obsession with secret intrusion reveals a sickening world-wide culture of institutional corruption and decay that threatens us all. Now, yet another scandal is about to break into the public domain, and it's a particularly vile example.
July 6th marks the 25th Anniversary of the one of the longest-operating medical cover-ups in recent British history. In 1988, twenty thousand people were at severe risk of being poisoned by accidentally contamination of the public water supply to North Cornwall - and the British government has done everything in its power to conceal its despicable role in trying to keep the effects of that incident safely under wraps.
Now we ask if it is time to start rooting out this sickness in our society, and to bring those in government and the Civil Service to trial over their deliberate obstruction to justice for the people of North Cornwall.
If you wonder what the poisoning of a public water supply has to do with water fluoridation, just pause a moment and read on. Residual aluminium left over from water treatment is the primary environmental cause of the epidemic of Alzheimer's Disease that is now sweeping the
country. Adding fluoride to such drinking water may accelerate the rate at which that aluminium moves into the brain. It seems that it can speed up the 'ticking clock' of aluminium deposition in our brains that leads inexorably towards dementia in old age.
The Camelford Poisoning was an accident, and no deliberate experiment could ever be sanctioned to expose people to such a toxicological insult. The evidence of what happened to the 20,000 human guineapigs in this 'experiment' would be of immense value in improving our understanding of this devastating disease.
But the British government is determined that the results of that accidental 'experiment' shall never be salvaged. It is attempting to conceal its own culpability over the way in which it put political concern (for the impending sale of the water industry) before the welfare and health of the public. Now, people are dying from conditions caused by the heavy build-up of aluminium in their brains - but still the official obstruction to the essential reseacrh continues.
I am trying to force the government to hold an inquiry into the ways in which its own Department of Health has deliberately obstructed all efforts to help the people of my former home community, and have published a commentary on its latest attempt to deceive the public. Please go to this page to learn the background to this scandal, then access the British Medical Journal page with my own and other expert commentary, read the articles.
If you agree with what I and others have written, tick the 'Like' boxes. The more support these responses get, the stronger will be the pressure on our reluctant government to bring its own Department under control, and at last provide some measure of justice to my community.
The commentary is HERE
Please go and vote. It only takes a minute of your time,
compared with our twenty five years
of fighting for justice.
And if you can, link this BMJ commentary page to your Twitter, Facebook
and other social media pages - we need this to go around the world.
After all, thousands of the visitors to North Cornwall that week
were from overseas - they may even be
members of your own community.
Irish Petition falls on deaf ears (and dumb minds) yet again.
When Iva Pocock presented her late father Robert's petition before the European Petitions Committee
last week, she met the same ignorance and stupidity as he has faced for the past six years.
Until these procrastinating half-wits take expert advice on European law and toxicology, instead of
relying on the trusty fools and charlatans within their own organisation, this travesty
of 'justice' will continue to bring down well-deserved derision
on the concept of 'European unity'.
Doug Cross 24th June 2013
It is time to call the rambling European Petitions Committee to account. At its latest meeting to hear Robert Pocock’s petition to force the Irish (and British) governments to recognise fluoridated water as a medicine, and get it out of the taps, it once again meandered around the issue, procrastinating yet again on this urgent and important test of the European system of justice.
Robert’s petition is now being presented by his daughter Iva. And just like Robert, she was faced with a bunch of intellectually challenged bureaucrats who appeared to have absolutely no understanding of either European law or of science. The lawyer advising this bunch of half-wits must have been trained in the School of Comic Relief, and appeared to be expert in the application of gibberish to Community medicinal and food laws.
And when it comes to science, their illiteracy is impressive, if somewhat alarming. One of the members actually objected that the permissible limit for fluoride is well below that specified in the Drinking Water Directive, and therefore cannot do harm. Since fluoridated water is NOT drinking water, the Directive is irrelevant - the fundamental issue here is the long-term toxicity of an unlicensed medicine (or rather, a cumulative poison), administered without consent.
The short-term (acute) toxicity of such a substance provides no guidance whatsoever on its safety over a lifetime, especially when it also promotes the accumulation of yet another neurotoxin - aluminium - that causes dementia in the elderly.
According to Irish MEP Marion Harkin, the Commission claims that it doesn't need to regulate "because there are only three Member States affected". Really - only three? I remind the Commission that there are currently around 12 million people in Ireland, the UK and Spain who are currently subjected to this illegal State-mandated medical assault, and that this is due to rise to around 30 million souls soon, if the British government sticks to its expansionist plan.
The Commission’s callous disregard for the right of millions of citizens to receive the same level of protection under the legal framework of the Community as all of the others, is absolutely breath-taking. The sooner these stupid bureaucrats are replaced by people with both brains and integrity, the sooner we’ll get justice for the tens of thousands of kids whose teeth are disfigured every year by this appalling practice.
Fluoridation in the UK - the end of an era.
Whilst three of the four national entities that make up the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland resolutely refuse to allow water fluoridation, only the lunatic English allow their government to poison their kids on the pretext of ‘public health’.
Yet things are not what the health police would have you believe. Behind the scenes a bitter war of attrition is going on, between the health and water sectors. Unless you’re in the know, you won’t see it, you won’t even suspect it. But here, for the first time, is the inside story of how fluoridation is being successfully opposed by those most at risk - the commercial sector water companies.
The Camelford Poisoning
- latest Report a meaningless 'Risk Assessment",
designed to find nothing'.
My commentary on the CoT report on the Camelford Poisoning, condemning the 25 year cover-up and calling for an independent inquiry into the Dept of Health's obstruction, has now been published in the British Medical Journal (Rapid Responses), so it's now officially a peer-reviewed scientific paper! We now need as many people as possible to go to the BMJ web site ( http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f3376?tab=responses) and register a 'Like!' vote for my and Chris Exley's responses.
The more votes we get, the more pressure we can put on MPs to demand that this obscene long-running cover-up be subjected to a full Parliamentary Select Committee Inquiry. The idea has already been raised in Westminster, so let's bring this to the boil. People in the community who were exposed to this terrible event are now dying from the dementia that I and a few others warned would be the probable outcome, right back in 1988 at the time of the accident.
PLEASE CLICK HERE AND VOTE NOW!
After 25 years of fighting to get a full independent inquiry into the cover-up over the mass poisoning by aluminium sulphate of 20,000 people in North Cornwall, UK during the summer of 1988, things are coming to a head in Britain. Doug’s wife, Carole, died in 2004, and was the first of the many victims to be properly examined after she died, purely because Doug was the only person who knew what to do in such harrowing circumstances. The result was sensational - Carole died from very severe aluminium poisoning, after drinking some of the contaminated water 16 years earlier.
The government’s latest attempt to obscure the evidence, a 12 year-long study by the government’s advisory body, the Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Foods, Consumer Products and the Environment (CoT) has just published its Final Report - and it’s a shocking example of how even an expert committee can be diverted safely into harmless avenues that protect civil servants from embarrassing exposure.
But that’s not going to happen this time. Doug was a member of that CoT sub-Group for 12 years, and constantly opposed the methods used in the investigation. When it proposed to publish, he resigned last year and refused to allow his name to be linked to the Report. Now another victim has been examined, again with Doug’s intervention and assistance, with equally alarming results, damning the CoT report as inadequate and scientifically biased.
Doug and others will be going public shortly - so we’ll keep you informed on how his ‘second string’ is progressing. If you’ve ever wondered why he’s been so passionately concerned over the poisoning of public water supplies by fluoride, this will tell you what’s been behind his lethal analyses all these years - Aluminium is a leading environmental cause of Alzheimer’s Disease. And deliberately adding fluoride to water with even a trace of aluminium in it helps that aluminium to get to the brain faster. That's why this issue is of such crucial importance to the anti-fluoridation movement - this epidemic is out off control, and will get far worse - it's predicted that the proportion of people who ultimatley develop AD will treble in the next few decades, just do the maths and be afraid -
be very, very afraid!
For a copy of this Report, CLICK HERE (and then wait - it stretches to over 800 pages!)
(Extremely serious critical comments on the 2005 Draft, from the REAL experts in Aluminium toxicology,
have been removed from this official web page. Anyone know why that might be?
But check out this BMJ page for at least some of what's inexplicably been left
out of the latest attempt at political obstruction of scientific research!)
And for recent news on this latest charade, and my (printable) comments, go HERE and HERE
New Challenge to Fluoridation in Ireland
Sinn Féin TD Brian Stanley is taking on the Irish government
over its refusal to end fluoridation.
In his new Health (Fluoridation of Water Supply) (Repeal) Bill, published on 9th May 2013, Stanley is challenging the government to implement European law on medicines and ban fluoridation. UKCAF has been in contact with Sinn Féin for many years, and recently sent copies of our analyses on European law on medicines.
Oshlack v Rous Water - latest.
What's next for Our Hero Down Under?
Al Oshlack's appeal against the decision of Judge Pepper to reject his claims against the way in which Rous Water went through the planning phase of its new fluoridation project has been dismissed. Now he faces costs of around Aus$500,000 to pay for the action.
So is this the end of a gallant but doomed challenge? Possibly not, because there's yet another hoop to jump through before all possible argument is exhausted. And it's quite a fascinating one, too.
The latest Appeal hearing was on whether or not the relevant law had been followed, not on whether fluoridation is itself legal. But behind the public argument there is an issue that has, so far at least, not appeared to raise its inconvenient head.
There is a basic principle that operates when a law is intended to 'cover the field' - that is, it sets out the generic framework with which all relevant decisions must comply. Medicinal law is one such example - it is intended to apply to all products that fall under the definition of medicines.
In the EU that law is Directive 65/65/EEC, now replaced by 2004/27/EC, and it applies to all medicinal products used by all Member States within the European Community. Precisely the same situation exists in Australia, where the Commonwelath federal law on medicinal products, the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, is intended to cover the field of medicines in all States in the country.
Fluoridation laws are generally passed by States within a Federation (for example, by the governments of the UK and Ireland in the EU, and by individual States in Australia). But these all fail to recognise that Federal law applies to fluoridated water. And if these National or State laws are inconsistent with Federal law, then they cannot be enforced, unless the over-riding Federal laws are first repealed.
The concept of Federal law ‘covering the field’ and over-riding inconsistent State legislation is central to S. 190 of the Constitution of Australia, so since the hearing in Oshlack was held and judged under the laws of the State of New South Wales, the way now appears to be open for an appeal for a final decision in the Federal High Court of the Commonwealth of Australia, on the grounds that State fluoridation laws are inconsistent with the laws of the Commonwealth of Australia - and specifically with S.109 of the Constitution, and cannot be enforced.
It will be very interesting to see what happens next. After all, if you've got a bill for half a million already, why not go for broke with a last-ditch 'Hail Mary? You never know, it might just score that last minute goal after all!
So far I haven't been able to find the actual decision of the Court itself, so here's a link to what local reports say about this fascinating case
Australia erupts over fluoridation.
With the relaxing of State control over water fluoridation and the transfer to Councils of responsibility for deciding on whether or not to fluoridate local water supplies, the Queensland government has opened a Pandora’s box of public debate. Towns throughout the State are abolishing existing fluoridation schemes, whilst new projects are finding increasing opposition and many are likely to be dropped before they can be completed. We at UKCAF are at the heart of several court actions to stop fluoride being added to local water, with the main emphasis being on the right to refuse compulsory medication.
Past experience has shown that attempting to prove that the claimed benefits of fluoridation outweigh the proven disadvantages is a waste of time - the pseudo-scientists employed by the State invariably provide so much misinformation that Courts are incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction. But the right to personal integrity is gradually beginning to dominate the arguments, with very substantial reliance on Doug’s analyses for guidance.
For links to what’s new in Oz, go HERE
A question of contract.
Can a consumer refuse to pay for fluoridated drinking water if there is a statutory contract between the State and water suppliers in the EU to provide ‘water intended for human consumption’? Are we dealing with a breach of a contract in which the public is the third party beneficiary? Well - maybe! Here’s our take on this interesting question - but remember, as the Queensland Dept of Health so indignantly pointed out when faced with some inconvenient suggestions about the application of law, I’m not a lawyer!
That European Court of Justice ruling on ‘functional drinks’
- does this really apply to fluoridated water?
The Queensland Dept of Health (QDH), bless ‘em, has been getting pretty hett up recently about the analysis that I put out in 2009 on the case of Warenvertriebs and Orthica, before the European Court of Justice (ECJ). I was first alerted to this fascinating case by our very own Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency - known to, and despised by, millions here in the UK - as the MHRA. They were alarmed that this ruling might be seen as prohibiting the non-consensual administration of fluoridated water to the complaining masses of - well, England, really, as the rest of the UK has quite sensibly told them where to put their unlicensed medicine!
So, no, dear QDH, I admit that I really am not a lawyer - but then, I never said I was, of course. So do stop trying to run my reputation down and deal with the actual message - shooting messengers is a violation of our human rights. Folk from your neck of the woods have been asking me if the ECJ ruling really does apply to fluoridated water. And as far as I can see, from my miserably deprived perspective as a mere biologist, it sure looks that way to me. The ECJ ruling dealt with the application of food and medicinal law to all consumable products that fall into the class of ‘functional foods. Claiming that this concoction prevents tooth decay is a medical claim - so it has both a nutritional value (although many now dispute that!) and a medical use. It’s a functional food, and as such, comes under the ECJ ruling.
So read my recent letter to Merilyn Haines in Oz, and make up your own minds.
Then go and see a lawyer, and get some proper legal advice!