Sunraysia's Anti Fluoridation Network

Sunraysia's Anti Fluoridation Network

We are a group of concerned citizens fighting against an anti democratic campaign by the Victorian Government & Mildura Rural City Council to introduce the S7 poison Hydrofluorosilicic Acid (Fluoride) to our vital drinking water supply.

94% of surveyed resident's say NO!

Why are they going ahead with expensive and dangerous Fluoridation when the people clearly don't want it?
Last time I checked I thought we lived in a democracy?

The following is a list of articles and commentary intended to educate people to the truths of Fluoride - Make up your own mind!

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Straight from the Horses Mouth

Hey everyone!

Just found an interesting website from a Chinese Fluoride Manufacturer (just in case any of you wish to for whatever reason to poison a large number of people) You also can do what Lower Murray Water, Mildura Rural City Council and countless other Tin Pot Dictatorships dotted right around the nation are doing - buy yourself 5 tons of Fluoride!!!

If for instance you are lucky enough to live in a small town or a farm that does not "enjoy" the Orwellian 1984 governments chemical lobotomizing forced medication program YOU TOO can now enjoy the STALINIST Siberian Gulag or NAZI Concentration Camp Experience and order your own Fluoride!

Thats right - calm those damn kids down with a constant source of PROZAC straight from your water tap!

Just ring or email Zhejiang Qucheng Chemicals in China and order away, for a measly $6000 US you can have your 5 ton bulk bin of dirty Chinese factory chimney scrubber waste delivered to your door!
Lets face it - with prices like that you would be MAD not to.

Oh and if you have any Fluoride left over after lobotomizing your children and killing any elderly or sick people in the house according to the good people at Zhejiang Quucheng Chemicals in their helpfully provided website info (provided below) you can also use your Fluoride to etch Glass, etch Lead, you can use it to eat the rust straight out of your old HQ Holden down the back yard, sterilize equipment, tan animal hides, harden your concrete and masonry or electroplating if you happen to be doing any, the uses are endless!


CAS NO. 16961-83-4; 1309-45-1; 12672-67-2

EINECS NO. 241-034-8
MOL WT. 144.08

H.S.CODE 2811.19.6090
TOXICITY Rat LD50 (Oral): 430mg/kg
SYNONYMS Hydrofluorosilicic Acid; Hydrosilicofluoric acid;Sand acid; Silicofluoric acid; Fluosilicic acid; Hydrofluorosilicic acid; Hydrofluosilic Acid; Hexafluorosilicic acid; Dihydrogen hexafluorosilicate; 氟硅酸; Hexafluorokieselsäure (Dutch); ácido hexafluorosilicico (Spanish); Acide hexafluorosilicique (French); Silicofluoric acid; Silicofluoride; Silicon hexafluoride dihydride; Fluorosilicic acid; H2SiF6; Hydrogen hexafluorosilicate;

DERIVATION by-product of phosphate fertilizer or HF and silica

SMILES (F-][Si+4]([F-])([F-])([F-])([F-])[F-]

CLASSIFICATION - Hydrogen compound, Fluoride, Silicate, Acid, Coordination compound

PHYSICAL STATE white to yellow solution
SPECIFIC GRAVITY 1.46 (60%), 1.28 ( 30%)
pH 1.2 (1% Sol.)
STABILITY Stable under ordinary conditions

Water fluoridation, Wood preservative, Sterilization of equipment, Electroplating, Tanning, Glass etching, Cement Hardening, Oil acidizing, Rust Removal in textile field, lead refining and fluorosilicate salt manufacture.

Wikipedia Linking:
The major use of sodium hexafluorosilicate and fluorosilicic acid is as fluoridation agents for drinking water. Sodium hexafluorosilicate has also been used for caries control as part of a silicophosphate cement, an acidic gel in combination with monocalcium phosphate monohydrate, and a two-solution fluoride mouth rinse. Both chemicals are also used as a chemical intermediate (raw material) for aluminum trifluoride, cryolite (Na3AlF6), silicon tetrafluoride, and other fluorosilicates and have found applications in commercial laundry. Other applications for sodium hexafluorosilicate include its use in enamels/enamel frits for china and porcelain, in opalescent glass, metallurgy (aluminum and beryllium), glue, ore flotation, leather and wood preservatives, and in insecticides and rodenticides. It has been used in the manufacture of pure silicon, as a gelling agent in the production of molded latex foam, and as a fluorinating agent in organic synthesis to convert organodichlorophosphorus compounds to the corresponding organodifluorophosphorus compound. In veterinary practice, external application of sodium hexafluorosilicate combats lice and mosquitoes on cattle, sheep, swine, and poultry, and oral administration combats roundworms and possibly whipworms in swine and prevents dental caries in rats. Apparently, all pesticidal products had their registrations cancelled or they were discontinued by the early 1990s. Fluorosilicic acid is used in the tanning of animal hides and skins, in ceramics and glass, in technical paints, in oil well acidizing, in the manufacture of hydrogen fluoride, for the sterilization of equipment (e.g., in brewing and bottling establishments and for copper and brass vehicles), and in electroplating. It is also employed as an impregnating ingredient to preserve wood and harden masonry and for the removal of mold as well as rust and stain in textiles.
International Chemical Safety Cards
Acid Characteristics: Fluorosilicic acid is a transparent, straw colored, corrosive liquid having the chemical formulation of H2SiF6. It is manufactured in modern rubber lined equipment producingan acid of high commercial purity. Commercial water solutions of the acid are available, having concentration of between 20% and 25% H2SiF6. Fluorosilicic acid is generally believed not to exist in the vapor phase, but only in solution. Upon vaporizing, it decomposes into hydrofluoric acid (HF) and silicon tetrafluoride. This equilibrium exists at the surface of strong solutions of fluorosilicic acid and if stored in glass containers, the small concentration of hydrofluoric acid may very slowly attack the glass above the solution level. For this reason, it is generally shipped in polyethylene containers rather than glass carboys. A 23% fluorosilicic acid water solution weighs 10.2 pounds per gallon at 60ºF, and has a fluoride (F) content of 17.41%.

APPEARANCE - white to yellow solution
ASSAY (H2SiF6) - 23.0% min
FLUORINE (F) - 18.0% min
HEAVY METALS - 20ppm max
VISCOSITY - 6.5 cps
PACKING 25kgs in plastic drum
HAZARD CLASS 8 (Corrosive)
UN NO.- 1778 (Packing group: II)

-Fluorosilicic Acid is available generally as a 20 to 40 percent aqueous solution.
-60-70% solution will be solidified at 19 C to form a dihydrate crystalline.


Product CAS RN Quantity Price $US
Fluorsilicic acid 25% 16961-83-4 5,000kgs $6,000

Buy a drum now while stocks last!


Monday, December 27, 2010

National Security Hotline gets a tip off That Lower Murray Water is poisoning the local water supply

I have just received a letter from a local Fluoride activist and all round "good citizen" who has reported Lower Murray Water and its cheerleader/globalist prostitute/spokesman Owen Russell to the National Security Hotline for the Terrorist act of dumping an S7 poison into the local water supply.

Would you like to meet the people who are making you sick?
Well here they are, the glib tongued sycophant Owen Russell is on the left.

It will be interesting to see if the Australian Security Apparatus responds or investigates these crimes as they should.

Here is a copy of the email

From: xxxx xxxx
Date: Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 4:02 PM
Subject: ATTN: National Security Hotline – Reporting Water Crimes

Dear NSH,

I wish to report criminal, terrorist and treasonous actions against the people of Mildura, Victoria, which I believe merit immediate actions including the arrest of all involved.

I wish to report Lower Murray Water ( for poisoning the local drinking water supply with Hydrofluorosilicic Acid – a Schedule (S7) Poison scrubbed from the pollution smokestacks of the phosphate fertilizer industry – which contains numerous carcinogenic and neurotoxic heavy metal contaminants, and which has never been tested for safety in humans.

This chemical has been added against the will of 94% of the local population.

The water supply of a nation is its lifeblood and must be kept safe for the consumption of citizens.

If a foreign army were to enter Australia and poison the water with such a chemical, it would be considered an act of war against this nation.

Therefore, I hope you will act swiftly to investigate and bring to justice all those involved in these criminal actions.

For further research, please visit: &

Thank you,

xxxx xxxx

Great stuff, I look forward to hearing more from this person.

Ewwwww Yuck its Lower Murray Poisoned Water :(

Dr. Carnie Receives Bad News

Hahahahahahaha LMFAO someone from Mildura has carefully cobbled together this piece of ultra informative comic mastery.

Its best seen in full screen mode.

I certainly hope that Dr Carnie-val Freak and the rest of his Bureau-Cretins at the Victorian Department of Human Services take the time to have a look at our message.

Up yours Dr Carnie!

Lots of love as usual from the good citizens of Mildura :D

Sunday, September 5, 2010

Scientific Study Finds Fluoride Horror Stories Factual

Industrial by-product consumed by millions of Americans lowers IQ, causes cancer

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, January 15, 2008

The establishment media will have to find a new tactic with which to ridicule those who oppose the fluoridation of water after a major new Scientific American report concluded that "Scientific attitudes toward fluoridation may be starting to shift" as new evidence emerges of the poison's link to disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland, as well as lowering IQ.

"Today almost 60 percent of the U.S. population drinks fluoridated water, including residents of 46 of the nation’s 50 largest cities," reports Scientific American's Dan Fagin.

Fagin is an award-wining environmental reporter and Director of New York University's Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program.

"Outside the U.S., fluoridation has spread to Canada, the U.K., Australia, New Zealand and a few other countries. Critics of the practice have generally been dismissed as gadflies or zealots by mainstream researchers and public health agencies in those countries as well as the U.S. (In other nations, however, water fluoridation is rare and controversial.)"

Indeed, the zeitgeist for scoffing at those who spoke of the dangers of mass medicating the public against their will with fluoride was the deranged and paranoid character of General Ripper in the hit 1964 Peter Selllers movie Dr. Strangelove.

But that stereotype is quickly fading as serious scientific research uncovers proof that all the horror stories about sodium fluoride told down the decades are essentially true.

The Scientific American study "Concluded that fluoride can subtly alter endocrine function, especially in the thyroid -- the gland that produces hormones regulating growth and metabolism."

The report also notes that "a series of epidemiological studies in China have associated high fluoride exposures with lower IQ."

"Epidemiological studies and tests on lab animals suggest that high fluoride exposure increases the risk of bone fracture, especially in vulnerable populations such as the elderly and diabetics," writes Fagin.

Fagin interviewed Steven Levy, director of the Iowa Fluoride Study which tracked about 700 Iowa children for sixteen years. Nine-year-old "Iowa children who lived in communities where the water was fluoridated were 50 percent more likely to have mild fluorosis... than [nine-year-old] children living in nonfluoridated areas of the state," writes Fagin.

The study adds to a growing literature of shocking scientific studies proving fluoride's link with all manner of health defects, even as governments in the west, including recently the UK, make plans to mass medicate the population against their will with this deadly toxin.

In 2005, a study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health found that fluoride in tap water directly contributes to causing bone cancer in young boys.

"New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - between the ages of 10 and 19," according to a London Observer article about the study.

Based on the findings of the study, the respected Environmental Working Group lobbied to have fluoride in tap water be added to the US government's classified list of substances known or anticipated to cause cancer in humans.

Cancer rates in the U.S. have skyrocketed with one in three people now contracting the disease at some stage in their life.

The link to bone cancer has also been discovered by other scientists, but a controversy ensued after it emerged that Harvard Professor Chester Douglass, who downplayed the connection in his final report, was in fact editor-in-chief of The Colgate Oral Health Report, a quarterly newsletter funded by Colgate-Palmolive Co., which makes fluoridated toothpaste.

An August 2006 Chinese study found that fluoride in drinking water damages children's liver and kidney functions.


- Fluoride is a waste by-product of the fertilizer and aluminum industry and it's also a Part II Poison under the UK Poisons Act 1972.

- Fluoride is one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin nerve gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUoride).

- USAF Major George R. Jordan testified before Un-American Activity committees of Congress in the 1950's that in his post as U.S.-Soviet liaison officer, the Soviets openly admitted to "Using the fluoride in the water supplies in their concentration camps, to make the prisoners stupid, docile, and subservient."

- The first occurrence of fluoridated drinking water on Earth was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force the people in their concentration camps into calm submission. (Ref. book: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin.)

- 97% of western Europe has rejected fluoridated water due to the known health risks, however 10% of Britons drink it and the UK government is trying to fast track the fluoridation of the entire country's water supply.

- In Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg fluoridation of water was rejected because it was classified as compulsive medication against the subject's will and therefore violated fundamental human rights.

- In November of 2006, the American Dental Association (ADA) advised that parents should avoid giving babies fluoridated water.

- Sources of fluoride include: fluoride dental products, fluoride pesticides, fluoridated pharmaceuticals, processed foods made with fluoridated water, and tea.

Click here to find out if your water supply is poisoned with deadly fluoride.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

INFOWARS launches anti Fluoride campaign

INFOWAR'S global Anti-Fluoride campaign has come at an opportune time for the Sunraysia Anti Fluoride Network.

Activists and concerned citizens world wide are taking part in this campaign to spread the facts about water Fluoridation, we in Sunraysia are no different.

With the addition of Fluoride to Sunraysias water supplies our education campaign is being stepped up not reduced as has happened to other cities around the world that have suffered the water supplies being poisoned by Fluoride, a credit to the passion and zeal of the citizenry of Sunraysia.

Anyone wishing to take part in this campaign can find flyers and other materials here -

Flyer PDF

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Oh Dear - just look at what they are putting in your water!

For those of us that are familiar with MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets) for toxic chemicals may find this interesting.

Here is the MSDS for Hydrofluorosilicic Acid (Fluoride), the S7 poison they are putting in your water.

This document comes straight from the horses mouth - Incitec Pivot - the manufacturer of Fluoride and its derivative compounds.
This document is intended for use by all persons that come in near contact or have the misfortune to have to work with this toxin, it recommends safety measures for its safe handling, use and what to do in the event of a spill.

Another MSDS for Fluoride from the US

Here are some highlights!

"Hazards Identification

Emergency Overview

SAF-T-DATA(tm) Ratings (Provided here for your convenience)
Health Rating: 3 - Severe (Poison)
Flammability Rating: 0 - None
Reactivity Rating: 1 - Slight
Contact Rating: 3 - Severe
Storage Color Code: Blue (Health)"

"Potential Health Effects

If inhaled or swallowed, this compound can cause fluoride poisoning. Early symptoms include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and weakness. Later effects include central nervous system effects, cardiovascular effects and death.

Causes severe irritation to the respiratory tract, symptoms may include coughing, sore throat, and labored breathing. May be absorbed through inhalation of dust; symptoms may parallel those from ingestion exposure. Irritation effects may not appear immediately.
Toxic! May cause salivation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. Symptoms of weakness, tremors, shallow respiration, cardopedal spasm, convulsions, and coma may follow. May cause brain and kidney damage. Affects heart and circulatory system. Death may occur from respiratory paralysis. Estimated lethal dose = 5-l0 grams.
Skin Contact:
Causes irritation, with redness and pain. Solutions are corrosive. Effects may not appear immediately.
Eye Contact:
Eye irritant! May cause irritation and serious eye damage. Effects may not immediately appear.
Chronic Exposure:
Chronic exposure may cause mottling of teeth and bone damage (osteosclerosis) and fluorosis. Symptoms of fluorisis include brittle bones,weight loss, anemia, calcified ligaments, general ill health and joint stiffness.
Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions:
Populations that appear to be at increased risk from the effects of fluoride are individuals that suffer from diabetes insipidus or some forms of renal impairment."

And ----

"First Aid Measures

First aid procedures should be pre-planned for fluoride compound emergencies.
If inhaled, remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. CALL A PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY.
Administer milk, chewable calcium carbonate tablets or milk of magnesia. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. CALL A PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY.
Skin Contact:
Wipe off any excess material from skin and then immediately flush skin with large amounts of soapy water. Remove contaminated clothing and shoes. Wash clothing before re-use. Apply bandages soaked in magnesium sulfate. CALL A PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY.
Eye Contact:
Immediately flush eyes with gentle but large stream of water for at least 15 minutes, lifting lower and upper eyelids occasionally. Call a physician immediately.

Note to Physician:
For large exposures, systemic effects (hypocalcemia and hypomagnesia) may occur."

And -----

"Other Information

NFPA Ratings: Health: 3 Flammability: 0 Reactivity: 0
Label Hazard Warning:
Label Precautions:
Do not breathe dust.
Keep container closed.
Use only with adequate ventilation.
Wash thoroughly after handling.
Avoid contact with eyes, skin and clothing."

Friday, August 6, 2010

Fluoride Truth on Today Tonight Adelaide.

This is an excellent short synopsis of the Fluoride issue by Today Tonight Adelaide - well done!

Everyone should see this.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Article by Doug Cross

Unreliable evidence? The closed circle of fluoride advocates.

One of the bodies cited in Al Young's Statement to the Land and Environment Court is ARCPOA, that well-known subsidiary of Colgate-Palmolive, and you should be wary about that Institution's attitude towards water fluoridation. It is the home of some of the principal proponents in the Australian water fluoridation movement, and its Director, Prof John Spencer, is a well-known advocate of fluoridation there.

Prof Spencer has direct links to the UK fluoride cabal here in the UK, at Manchester University He has attended the annual Conference of the our government's spurious fluoride propaganda outfit, the National Fluoride Information Centre (NFIC). Both Colgate-Palmolive and the NFIC have a very close relationship with ARCPOA and the pro-fluoride movement generally in Australia. The NFIC has in the past provided financial support (i.e. the UK taxpayers' money) to Australian delegates to its Annual Conference. An exposure of the NFIC scam is on our popular web page (

(To confirm Prof Spencer's links with the NFIC - just Google 'A J Spencer NFIC' to see the list of references not just to his published papers on the NFIC website, but to material that he has presented personally at these Conferences.)

The present Director of the NFIC is a Colgate Professor of Dental Something-or-other at Manchester University. There seems to have been a close realtionship between Manchester and Melbourne Universities during the student and staff riots in Melbourne over the bankrupting of the University by a former senior member of the staff who is now, apparently,employed at our very own hot-bed of pro-fluoridation activism, Manchester University.

The 'prestigious' H Trendley Dean Memorial Award

Prof Anthony Blinkhorn OBE set up, and was the first Director of, the NFI at Manchester, and is now prominent in his evangelising of Australian Townships over to the religion of fluoridation. He was the proud recipient in 2005 of the - and I quote - 'prestigious H Trendly Dean Memorial Award', presented in Brisbane, Australia, and supported by those nice people at Colgate-Palmolive. More recently he 'retired' from the NFIC, although he retains 'an advisory role' in its operations from his new base at Sydney University. He has strong links with the Adelaide University School of Dentistry, and of course ARCPOA, and is exceedingly (or perhaps that should be excessively?) active in spreading fluoridation to the caries-ridden masses in Australia.

This may give you a clearer idea of just how tightly this whole fluoridation hoax is actually controlled to protect the Holy Brand of Fluoride by the vested interests of the toothpaste manufacturers. The work that H Trendly Dean published, and that set the scene for the modern-day ubiquity of fluoride contamination, has been dismissed by Mark Diesendorf in the Journal 'Nature' for its
virtual absence of quantitative, statistical methods, their nonrandom method of selecting data and the high sensitivity of the results to the way in which the study populations were grouped (

In other words, the data were selected to support the theory that fluoride works, all inconvenient evidence was discarded, and the statistical analyses - at least, what there were of them - were scientifically naive and fixed to hide any discrepancies! Now honestly - is that the sort of award that you would like to be given?

Don't mention fluorosis!

One of the activities of ARCPOA is to publish the results of surveys of dental health in Australian States. These are remarkable for one thing above all others as far as the anti-fluoride protest movement is concerned - there is a complete absence of reference to dental fluorosis, the most common dental disease in Australia. For example - just a random selection, the first one to hand - see 'Oral Health in South Australia 2004' ( - in this publication the word 'fluorosis' does not appear at all.

To be fair, ARCPOA does publish research that mentions fluorosis - for example see 'Oral health-related quality of life, fluorosis and caries among children.' L Do* and AJ Spencer ( But even this needs to be treated with - well let us simply say a certain degree of caution. The authors (including our old friend, Prof Spencer) conclude that fluorosis is viewed by kids as a desirable condition -
"Caries and malocclusion showed negative impact on child and parental OHRQoL (oral health-related quality of life) indicators while mild fluorosis had a positive impact."

The extraordinary claim that kids prefer teeth that have the opacities of dental fluorosis, because they look whiter, is becoming the dental sector's panic reaction to the adverse publicity that fluorosis is now getting. Fluoride researchers appear to have got this result by asking their test subjects for their opinion about fluorosis before telling them exactly what the condition really is and how it can affect teeth in later life. That seems to me just a little a bit like the British Fluoridation Society's favourite wheeze - trying to drum up support for fluoridation by asking the totally unacceptable and invalid leading question in public opinion polls in the UK - "Are you in favour of water fluoridation if it prevents tooth decay?"

Is fluoridation based on scientific fraud?

Well that depends on what you think constitutes scientific fraud? Here's a short summary - you can judge whether it is a factor in the spread of unaqcceptable pro-fluoridation propaganda.

If medical information released by any person or body that the public may be expected to accept as an authority on a specific subject is used by fluoridation proponents to promote their bid to add fluoride to public water supplies, then any apparent bias in the way that it reports - or indeed, fails to report - the prevalence and implications of dental fluorosis needs to be considered for its admissibility in evidence. In extreme circumstances, if an information source is presented in such a way that it might be interpreted as constituting intent to deceive or mislead, then an action for fraud could even be contemplated.

So, for a general test that may be applied to any public document or scientific publication or statement that may affect medical health, the following issues should be subject to scrutiny. A document, opinion or statement may be regarded as being fraudulent if it fails to comply with any or all of the following criteria:-

It may be fraudulent
1) by deliberate omission of any material fact that is relevant to a balanced understanding of the issues raised. The selective use of evidence relating to only one side of an argument - the 'Devil's Advocate' approach - may be acceptable in ordinary recreational debate, but cannot be permitted when issues of actual public safety and welfare are under discussion as matters of fact.
2) by deliberate misrepresentation, if it presents arguments regarding factual material that is designed to mislead the reader/listener, or misrepresents the views of the person(s) carrying out or publishing the statement or opinion that is being quoted in argument.
3) by breach of a Duty of Care if it leads to the deception of the reader/listener, or to neglect of the welfare and well-being of such person(s). This applies especially to issues of medical practice (including dental practice), including both physical interventions and the establishment or implementation of public policies.

Is fluoridation subject to the rules covering clinical research?

The issue needs to be raised as to whether or not fluoridation of public water supplies may be regarded as clinical research, and not merely dismissed as 'a necessary public health measure'. In the circumstances in which it is employed, and in view of the its disputed efficacy and safety, its continued promotion and implementation must be regarded as clinical research albeit on an almost unprecedented scale, and therefore subject to the constraints governing the experimental exposure of the public to a pharmacologically active substance. This issue appears not to have been recognized by the dental or public health sectors, and consequently may have serious legal implications. This is especially the case in view of the well-known very high prevalence of adverse side effects that always accompany fluoridation, and the apparent deliberate concealment by those promoting the practice of the inevitability of an epidemic of dental fluorosis in every fluoridated community.

If water fluoridation is imposed on a community with the objective of achieving a specific medical effect, then it is a medicinal intervention. As such it is subject to medicinal legislation. It is almost invariably planned to compare the results of this intervention with data from the same population before the intervention, or of comparing the result on the health of the community with that of other communities that have or that do not have water fluoridation. There are therefore three stages in the process - first the assessment of the existing pre-fluoridation prevalence of dental caries. This is followed by the implementation of the intervention procedure. Finally, after the lag phase of the response to treatment, the medical effects are monitored.

By any definition, this process constitutes clinical research and as such must, by law, be subject to the extremely stringent constraints and procedures that are demanded for all such trials. I have seen no evidence that public fluoridation schemes have been, or are being, carried out under those protocols that have been designed specifically to protect the public from such abuse.

Indeed, due to the vast scale of such trials, there is absolutely no possibility of controlling for confounding factors, or of even monitoring the most fundamental variable involved - that of the dosage of 'fluoride' in its various forms to which the subjects are actually exposed. It is therefore utterly impossible to devise any procedure that would permit such trials to be carried out in a scientifically valid and ethically acceptable fashion.

Absence of public consent and the liability of fluoridation proponents.

In any such trial, the fully informed consent of every subject participating in the research is mandatory - to proceed without written consent could be viewed by a Court to constitute medical assault. Should the intervention result in the development of a predictable but undisclosed adverse effect resulting in actual physical damage to the subject, then that would constitute assault causing actual bodily harm. In most legal codes such actions are subject to action in the Criminal Courts; they may also be subject to legal action for medical damages in the Civil Courts..

In addition, the quality of any investigatory research that it is proposed to carry out must be subject to strict medical and ethical scrutiny by a qualified Medical Research Ethics Committee. The circumstances under which subjects are to be exposed, the dosage regimes to be used, and the protocols for establishing the medical responses of the subjects must all be fully specified in advance. Full details of how the trial is to be monitored, and on what evidence the baseline status of each individual involved will be assessed, must be fully established. And the Committee must be satisfied that the results of the trial will be assessed using appropriate protocols of statistical analysis. And as in every authorized medical trial, it is an absolute requirement that any person participating must be able to withdraw their consent at any time, without fear of suffering from delayed or future adverse reactions, and without having to provide any reason for their terminating their participation

In the case of fluoridation, the entire process of 'monitoring' is totally worthless. For example, the delayed eruption of children's teeth in fluoridated communities invalidates the comparison of same-age children - 'researchers' appear to believe that the prevalence in same-age children is of more validity that the prevalence of caries in same-age teeth. The invalidity of this improper statistical analysis of the data was exposed by Ziegelbecker over forty years ago, and its continued rejection by pro-fluoridation proponents can now only be regarded as deliberate scientific fraud.

The issue of Professional Indemnity Insurance for those prescribing fluoridation.

The legal position of any health official effectively prescribing by endorsement, recommendation or order, to any individual or organization responsible for administering these unlicensed substances to the public, is extremely precarious. The restrictions on the clinical use of any unlicensed medicinal substance impose very severe constraints on the circumstances under which they may be used, and there is strict liability on the prescriber for the welfare of every one of their subjects.

They are personally liable for any medical damages that may result from their action, and those medical insurance companies that provide Professional Indemnity Insurance for members of the health profession require that in every case in which an 'off-label' drug is administered the practitioner must inform them in advance of their intent. It is also a strict requirement that administration of the substance must cease as soon as the treatment is completed or has no further prospect of being beneficial (even assuming that it actually works, of course).

Health professionals, or their employers, should therefore hold urgent discussions with their insurers to establish just what liability they may be incurring should they decide with medicinal intent to order the administration of unlicensed fluoridation chemicals to very large numbers of individuals. Their targets are in fact already the patients of other medical and dental practitioners, of all ages and medical conditions, and have in many cases specifically withheld their consent to the proposed intervention. The implications for medical insurers of such unfortunate activities by their dental clients are truly awsome!

What to do next.

Given the extent of the legal improprieties of the dental and health sector, legal practitioners may be interested in considering whether past and current fluoridation interventions have been compliant with relevant clinical research ethics and procedures. Many local communities have been fluoridated and then subjected to monitoring and analysis by dental researchers. If, as I have suggested, this could be viewed as constituting clinical research trials into the use of these unlicensed medicinal substances, then it would be prudent for objectors to check out the exact situation with respect to Australian legislation and precedent relating to fraud, medical interventions and the ethical regulation of medical and clinical research. It may be apparent that the way in which information has been used by fluoridation proponents to persuade or force the public to be subject to fluoridated water supplies constitutes a violation of one or more of the fundamental principles governing the performance and monitoring of medical interventions on the general public.

I have found that, once lawyers get involved, enthusiasm for fluoridating public water supplies tends to evaporate even more quickly than water spilled on a hot pavement! For example, the case of the Southampton Judicial Review on what 'consult' actually means in English law has had an amazingly inhibitory effect on the vigor with which fluoridation is being promoted here in the UK.

My latest review of the 'Catch 22' legal situation in which English water providers now find themselves (see our web site front page article 'Criminalizing the water sector. Why the English fluoridation legislation must be repealed' - is quietly working its way into the boardrooms of our timorous water companies. They have so far tried to sit firmly on a very shaky fence over the issue of fluoridation, largely, I suspect, because my legal challenges are so well-founded. They are hoping that the government and the people will battle it out between themselves, and leave them out of the arguments - but the arguments are now being taken up my members of the public and forcing company chairmen to consider their own positions much more carefully.

So, all power to the elbows of those taking action against The System! I look forward to hearing the results of your legal challenges in due course - this is the only truly effective way to bring a halt to this discredited practice. My own submission to Rous Water is, of course, just a small part of the resources that are now becoming available to you all, but the above notes may also be of interest to them or others who may be considering challenging the Big Brother State.

Also, do check out my commentary on the conclusions of the EU expert Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks of water fluoridation (SCHER) - on our front page ( It's extremely relevant to all that you are doing in Oz, as it is yet another wedge driven into the claim that fluoridation works - SCHER has actually said that fluoridation is

'A crude measure of systemic fluoride treatment . . . without a detectable threshold for dental and bone damage.'
Think about that for a second - a medical 'treatment' that has no discernible threshold at which it has causes adverse effects is hardly something that any responsible society can permit. It entirely challenges all those medical standards and ethics that are normally applied by society for the protection of vulnerable members of the community from avoidable risks of harm. The implications of this SCHER decision are astounding, and you can't get a much clearer condemnation of water fluoridation than that! The maverick 'experts' who recommend this practice need to be rooted out and put where their disgraceful behavior is no longer a threat to the well-being of the rest of the community.

Anti-Fluoride hunger strike in Mt Gambier

Mount Gambier anti-fluoride campaigner Alex Young is now one week into his hunger strike.

He's lost almost six kilograms, but the government shows no sign of budging on the issue.

Alex Young was arrested after chaining himself to the Blue Lake gates early last week.

His protest wasn't heard by the Minister for Health so he resorted to a hunger strike.

"Definitely not as much energy as I normally have but that is to be expected," Mr Young said.

He's longing to have a hot dog once the strike is over.

Mr Young claims to have only left the Blue Lake for 30 minutes in the past week.

"It has been cold to say the least and I look forward to returning home at some point back to. Everyone likes their own bed," he said.

Choice Mount Gambier collected almost 7000 signatures calling for a referendum on whether fluoride should be added to the water.

The Health Minister John Hill is on leave until the end of the month.

"As most people say it's been a very convenient move," Mr Young said.

But the Minister's spokesperson says the leave has nothing to do with the fluoridation project or Mr Young's protest.

"I think the Government has been right through this process before and are very determined that we should have fluoride in our water and a lot of people within Mount Gambier also support that fact so I think it's a fait acompli," Mr Young said.

Mr Young says he'll reassess his position come August 15 when a support Choice day will be held at the Blue Lake.

"I support him 100 per cent," one resident said.

"Bigger fool him for not eating I think," another said.

"Personal choice I suppose if he wants to go that far I myself wouldn't do that because I don't think it's going to do any good to be quite honest," another remarked.

"There should be a referendum. If he's gone to the trouble of getting six or six and half thousand signatures there should be a referendum on it," a resident commented.

"Madness," another said.

A booklet explaining the petition and the Government's response is available at the Library and Council.

SA Water says fluoride will be added to the water late September.

Friday, July 23, 2010

Mayor admits Concern!

Fridays Sunraysia Daily Newspaper has a front page article titled "Fluoride Flip" in which it states -

Milduras community leaders have waded into the great Fluoride debate but it has come to late.
Just days before Fluoride flows into our water supply, Mayor Glenn Milne has admitted he personally does not want Fluoride in Sunraysia's drinking water.

"We shouldn't be adding anything that we don't need to our water - "Im not keen - When you understand that Fluoride is actually a poison in large quantities, theres always a concern there."

Wild stuff!
Even the Local council is beginning to come to its senses!
This is due in no small part the extensive education campaign undertaken by this group, which will continue and be stepped up until this toxic crap is removed forever from our vital water supply!

*We will not give up!
*We will not back off!
*We will be Victorious!

The article can be found here -

Here is an excerpt from the on line edition.

Sunraysia Daily News
Fluoride flip
23 Jul, 2010 04:00 AM
MILDURA’S community leaders have waded into the great fluoride debate but it has come too late.

Just days before fluoride flows into our water supply, Mayor Glenn Milne has admitted he personally does not want fluoride in Sunraysia’s drinking water.

“We shouldn’t be adding anything that we don’t need to our water,” he said.

“I’m not keen.

“When you understand that fluoride is actually a poison, in large quantities, there’s always a concern there.”

A phone survey of Mildura Rural City councillors yesterday revealed there are doubts within council about the benefits of fluoridation.

A majority believes the community should have been given a say, rather than being subjected to a State Government sanctioned “forced medication”.

But, love it or hate it, fluoride will be added into Mildura’s drinking water on Monday.

For more of this story, purchase your copy of Friday's Sunraysia Daily 23-7-2010.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Fluoride Flyers!

Some of you may be receiving some of these in your letterbox soon!


There are three types of manufactured fluoride and one natural called calcium fluoride:

Hydrofluorosolicic acid

Sodium silicofluoride

Sodium fluoride

Q. Where does a truck driver pick up his load of fluoride?

A. One source comes from the phosphate fertilizer industry.

Q. What part of the fertilizer manufacturing process does fluoride come from?

A. It is picked up in the pollution control devices of the exhaust chimneys of the factory

Q. What classification does it have?

A. It is toxic waste poison acid

Q. Where does it rate as a nutrient?

A. It has no rating as a nutrient. On the hazardous goods safety procedures sheet it states, permanent eye damage, permanent skin damage, total body acid suit fitted with a breathing apparatus must be worn (to avoid the risk of death), corrosive, and highly toxic, can be fatal if swallowed, may react with some metals to produce explosive hydrogen gas. It comes in containers clearly marked with the skull and crossbones – symbol to warn of death

Q. Is it good for your teeth?

A. It is a total body poison. There is nothing in fluoride that is good for your body. 3 ml in a medicine glass is a fatal dose.

Q. Is it safe in very low doses?

A. It can be diluted, but this just slows down the effects. It is never safe.

Q. Is it a medication?

A. Many medications are low dose poisons. A medication is something that is given to you to improve your health. There is nothing in fluoride to improve your health or your teeth. Yet the government insists on this mass medication!

Q. Does fluoride prevent tooth decay?

A. Tasmania has had fluoride the longest. Their own paper admits that they have the worst teeth in Australia. Initially fluoride hardens teeth, but over time the teeth with an over exposure of fluoride, chip and crack and affected parts fall out. Photos we have prove this happens. Dentists have also spoken about the damage that over exposure to fluoride does to teeth

Q. The government says it is safe and effective. Is it safe?

A. The dangerous goods class labels sheet states that solids or liquids that are able to cause, to varying severity, damage to living tissue, may be either acidic or caustic in nature, are a class hazard 8 in 9

Q. What would they do with fluoride poison if they were not putting it in our water?

A. The correct place for “toxic waste poison acid” is a toxic waste dump. Our group has researched and found a lot of information on fluoride. One report states fluoride is so toxic and dangerous that it cannot be simply dumped.

Q. Is the fluoride agenda about our teeth?

A. Stalin and Hitler were the first dictators known to use fluoride as a way of controlling people in their concentration camps. Fluoride kept people extremely docile and easy to manipulate. With enough fluoride in a person’s brain, they will become docile and controllable. Even on low doses, after one year, fluoride will permanently change a person’s ability to care about the truth, or anything or anyone, or to be logical.

In the Fluoridation Referendum run by the Mildura Anti- Fluoride group, 3,916 electors clearly stated their opposition to the fluoridation of Mildura’s water supply (94 out of every hundred voters opposed water fluoridation). In a democracy a referendum is the “discovered majority will of the people” By forcing fluoridation of community water supplies, the government is working against the people. You are paying them. They are your employees. When the government disobeys the people, you have dictatorship and tyranny – when the government obeys the people, you have democracy and freedom.

Q. What can people do about this forced fluoridation situation?

A. It’s your life. It’s your choice. It’s your health. Water fluoridation is a four party political agenda. This is an election year. Help us choose FREEDOM. Help us restore DEMOCRACY! Help us STOP WATER FLUORIDATION!! We need PEOPLE POWER! Every individual can help to make a difference

Check out the truth at

Contact or Phone: 50245885 or 50242124 to hear more about what you can do to help

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

European Court Ruling spells an end to water fluoridation.

Fluoridated water must be treated as a medicine, and cannot be used to prepare foods. That is the decision of the European Court of Justice, in a landmark case dealing with the classification and regulation of 'functional drinks' in member states of the European Community. (HLH Warenvertriebs and Orthica (Joined Cases C-211/03, C-299/03, C-316/03 and C-318/03) 9 June 2005)

Functional drinks are those products that have two different purposes – for example, nutrition and exerting a positive effect on some medical condition. They include 'near-water drinks with added minerals' and, in view of the properties claimed for fluoridated water by fluoride advocates, it must be classified as a 'functional food', and therefore falls within the scope of the relevant legislation.

Medicinal law takes precedent over food law.

The Court ruled that, where two different sets of rules appear to apply to a product, medicinal legislation must take precedent, and the product must be regulated as a medicine. It emphasized that medicines regulators in member states do not have the power to exercise discretion on the classification of such dual-function products. The repeated refusal of the British and Irish Regulators to recognize fluoridated water as a medicinal product is therefore an unlawful misuse of their powers, and one that requires immediate reversal.

ECJ rulings do not establish new laws, but clarify how existing ones should be applied, and are enforceable in the domestic legislation of all member states of the EC. In effect, this decision at last confirms the claim that I have made for many years – that existing medicinal law has always required that fluoridated water be regulated as a medicine. Fluoridated water has no medicinal marketing authorization ('product license'), and because of this it is – and always has been - illegal to supply it to the public, as the 1968 Medicines Act confirms.

As a 'medicinal water', the protection afforded by the water quality regulations that shield consumers from hazardous substances in drinking water does not apply. Its use in the processing of foodstuffs is also prohibited, under the food safety legislation. Aa a direct result of this ruling, all English and Irish legislation providing for water fluoridation are at last exposed as having been in violation of that fundamental prohibition, and must now be repealed.

The beginning of the end - fluoridation must now be banned, worldwide.

This ECJ ruling effectively puts the final nail in the coffin of water fluoridation, not only within the EC but worldwide. It establishes a very substantial but entirely justified obstacle to trade in food products that are prepared without proper regard to the protection of the public that is enshrined in law. The ruling must be recognized and enforced not only in every member state, but also in any external state that wishes to trade with the EC in processed foods. So just what can be done to resolve the present unacceptable situation?

One solution would be to grant a medicinal license to fluoridated water. But the Court ruled that any evaluation of a functional drink may only be done under the rigorous procedures required to scrutinise any pharmaceutical product. In the present state of scientific concern over the evidence of its lack of efficacy and safety it is impossible to imagine that such a license could ever be granted. If it were, it would immediately result in a world-wide denunciation from the scientific community that is fully aware of the improper commercial influence that is at the heart of the international promotion of fluoridated products.

The only acceptable response is to call a halt to this controversial practice now. The experience of the past half century has shown that it is completely unjustified - indeed, it is responsible for what may reasonably be described as a pandemic of avoidable chronic fluoride poisoning. In ruling that this type of product must be regulated under medicinal law, the Court has taken the final step towards bringing this disreputable practice to a long-delayed end. Let us hope that national Governments all over the world will heed this decision - the economic consequences will be dire for those who continue to attempt to continue this discredited and illegal practice.

Fluoride Deception Part 1

Fluoride Deception Part 2

Fluoride Deception Part 3

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Suppression of Civil Rights in Australia re: Fluoridation

In November 1994 the Victorian Parliament passed an amendment to the Fluoridation Act by changing the Constitution to stop the Supreme Court from hearing cases against Artificial Fluoridation. If you are poisoned by fluoride in Victoria tough luck, there is no protection under law.

The Tasmanian Government in 1995 passed a Bill through the Lower House to prohibit the holding of meetings on the subject of Fluoridation anywhere at all in Tasmania. Called the Consequential Amendments Bill it was later withdrawn but is being re-worded. Outside of Tasmania, no outcry, no boycotts, why?

A draconian law was enacted in NSW in 1989. Because of this law, a Council cannot cease Fluoridation of its own water supply, after requests by public demand, unless it gets permission from the Health Department. And there is little chance of that.

Australia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). This U.N. law states that 'no one shall be subjected without his consent to medical or scientific experimentation.' The Health Dept. cannot produce one double blind scientific study which proves absolutely the safety and efficacy of fluoridation. It seems we are all experimental subjects.

If fluoridation is so safe or effective, why this repressive legislation ?

Why don't we hear about it in the media?

Historical uses of Fluoride

*Comrade Stalin*

Death Toll - 66 million people Executed, Tortured, Starved, Frozen or Worked to Death in Gulags.
Job - Dictator and Murderous Megalomaniac.
Department - Soviet Russia
Fluoride race position 1st - First to introduce Fluoride into the water supply of Gulags (Concentration camps) in the 1930s.

A frozen Siberian Gulag.

*Comrade Hitler*

Death Toll - 25 million people Murdered, Tortured, Starved to death & WWII casualties.
Job - Dictator and Murderous Megalomaniac.
Department - Greater Germany.
Fluoride race position 2nd - Hitler got some great ideas from Stalin, one of which was the use of Fluoride in Concentration and prisoner of war camps.


*Comrade Carnie*

Job - Doctor and Fluoride Cheerleader
Department - Victorian Department of Human Services
Fluoride race position - Down the list a little but the lucky first to introduce Fluoride to Sunraysia

Fluoride - Some interesting facts

"The first (Ed actually 2nd) occurrence of fluoridated drinking water on Earth was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force the people in their concentration camps into calm submission."

Ref : The Crime and Punishment of I. G. Farben by Joseph Borkin

USAF Major George R. Jordan testified before Un-American Activity committees of Congress in the 1950's that in his post as U.S.Soviet liaison officer, the Soviets openly admitted to...

"Using the fluoride in the water supplies in their gulags (concentration camps), to make the prisoners stupid, docile, and subservient."

Fluoride, or Hydrofluorosilic acid (H 2 SiF 6 ), is not naturally occurring but is a waste by-product derived from the industrial manufacture of aluminium, zinc, uranium, aerosols, insecticides, fertilizers, plastics, lubricants and pharmaceuticals.

It is also a Part II Poison under the UK Poisons Act 1972 ranking in toxicity above lead and just below arsenic.

Fluoride is one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin nerve gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUoride).

American toothpastes containing fluoride are by law obliged to state, '"WARNING: Keep out of reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional help or contact a poison control center immediately."

Sodium Fluoride - The Obedience Drug!

Fluoride reduces Human IQ - Studies

Can you guess which of these lovely Australian girls are from towns with Fluoridated water supplies?

23 published studies report an association of reduced IQ
with high fluoride exposure

Studies listed here.

Human Cognitive Abilities.
In assessing the potential health effects of fluoride at 2-4 mg/L, the committee found three studies of human populations exposed at those concentrations in drinking water that were useful for informing its assessment of potential neurologic effects. These studies were conducted in different areas of China, where fluoride concentrations ranged from 2.5 to 4 mg/L. Comparisons were made between the IQs of children from those populations with children exposed to lower concentration of fluoride ranging from 0.4 to 1 mg/L. The studies reported that while modal IQ scores were unchanged, the average IQ scores were lower in the more highly exposed children. This was due to fewer children in the high IQ range. While the studies lacked sufficient detail for the committee to fully assess their quality and their relevance to U.S. populations, the consistency of the collective results warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence. Investigation of other mental and physiological alterations reported in the case study literature, including mental confusion and lethargy, should also be investigated.
Ref: bottom of page 220 to page 221

The NRC report also stated:

On the basis of information largely derived from histological, chemical, and molecular studies, it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means. To determine the possible adverse effects of fluoride, additional data from both the experimental and the clinical sciences are needed.

Tabulated data found here -

Health dept. issues fluoridation warning

ELLOWS FALLS -- The Vermont Department of Health is warning parents not to give any fluoridated water to infants under 12 months of age.

The recommendation comes on the heels of a recent statement from the American Dental Association that also asks parents not to mix infant formula with fluoridated water because of the risk it poses to the children.

It is the strongest statement to date from either the ADA or the health department concerning the health risks of the compound that is added to many municipal water supplies in the country to battle tooth decay.

"This warning went out to every dentist and pediatrician in the state," said Steve Arthur, oral health director for the Department of Health. "We now know that when dealing with infants that less is best."

The health department, and the ADA, still strongly endorse the use of fluoride in public water supplies and the groups also encourage people who do not get fluoride from their water to take daily supplements.

But recent research has proved that babies who are getting most of their nourishment from powdered formula take in much more fluoride, per weight, than older children.

The new studies show that high levels of fluoride in infants can cause discoloration of the teeth known as fluorosis.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breast feeding exclusively for the first six months, the health department said in a press release.

Arthur said prior to the new recommendation both the ADA and the Vermont Department of Health warned that parents should probably be aware of the amount of fluoride given to young children.

Arthur called fluorosis a minor health problem and he said the warning was given out to let parents know about the risk.

"This corrects a contrasting and confusing recommendation," Arthur said. "We are saying that we now have this information and we want to get it out so parents can make the choice."

Water has natural levels of fluoride, and Arthur said that parents should have their water tested if they use well water to mix formula.

The battle over adding fluoride to public water has raged across the state over the past few years.

In 2001, Brattleboro residents voted not to add the chemical to the town's water.

Last year voters in Bellows Falls rejected a proposal that would have stopped the use of fluoride. Bellows Falls adds fluoride to its water.

Burlington also recently decided to continue adding fluoride to the city's water.

Peter Taylor, executive director of the Vermont State Dental Society, said that even with last month's ADA statement and the more recent Vermont Department of Health warning, most dentists in the state still support water fluoridation.

"The ADA said there was a small possibility of fluorosis in infants and it is important that parents know about that," Taylor said. "Community water fluoridation is still good public health policy."

But Michael Connett, an anti-fluoride activist who works for the Fluoride Action Network, said the health department warning is an important wake-up call and should not be taken lightly.

For years, Connett said, both the ADA and the Vermont Health Department have been hesitant to do anything but fully endorse the use of fluoride.

A recent article in the British medical journal, The Lancet, reported that fluoride may also damage a child's developing brain.

And on Oct. 14, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration notified bottled water manufacturers that they can not claim that fluoridated water that is marketed to infants prevents tooth decay.

Adding fluoride to public water forces users to ingest the chemical whether they want it or not, Connett said. He called the practice reckless.

"It took them 60 years to finally acknowledge that fluoride is dangerous for infants," said Connett. "If fluoride is not safe for everybody than it is not safe for anyone. Period."


If the addition of sodium-fluoride to our (Australian) water supplies is so safe and effective, why has it been banned or abandoned in such enlightened European countries as: Norway, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, France, Italy, and West Germany?(1)

In proportion to it's population, Australia is the most heavily fluoridated country in the world; 98% of the world's population do not drink artificially fluoridated water.

Keen to drink this?

A Doctors opinion

When I think of fluoridation, two words come to mind: medical experiment. And the guinea pig is Y-O-U. That's right: Without any solid proof that ingesting fluoride was beneficial for your teeth-and with no safety tests conducted to determine its potential effects on the rest of your body - the government moved forward with the mass medication of the country's water supply.

Think about it: With the exception of fluoride, every other chemical added to tap water is for the purpose of improving the water's safety. Fluoride is the only chemical added for the purpose of medication. And just like all drugs doled out by Big Pharma, this one comes with a litany of potential side effects. The difference? There's no black box warning on your faucet like there is on a bottle of pills.

But there should be.

Did you know that for years fluoride was classified as a toxin? In fact, not too long ago its only approved uses were as an insecticide and a RAT POISON!

And that's just how your body treats it - as a poison.

Plenty of studies have been done over the years - and the results are frightening. Fluoridation has been linked to immune system alteration, musculoskeletal harm, genetic damage, thyroid dysfunction, and even cancer.

Do you think all that's worth preventing cavities?

Before you answer that, I have one more wrench to toss at you. More and more studies are showing that ingesting fluoride has absolutely no bearing on preventing tooth decay. And now the American Dental Association is advising that parents NOT give fluoridated water to babies - BECAUSE IT CAN CAUSE BRAIN DAMAGE!

Heard enough? Well, there's more. A lot more. I'll give you all the bone-chilling details of fluoride's effect on your body, and I'll tell you all about the best ways to avoid exposure to this toxic chemical in my FREE report, The Fluoride Myth Busted.

Contrary to what your dentist might tell you, you don't need fluoride to have healthy teeth. And if your dentist asks you where you heard such nonsense, tell him Dr. William Campbell Douglass II said so.

And just who am I, you may be wondering.

I've long been one of America's most popular mythbusters. I make it my mission to reveal the surprisingly inexpensive and easy road to real health - to the chagrin of pharmaceutical companies and surgeons everywhere.

I've been called "the conscience of modern medicine," and the National Health Federation voted me "Doctor of the Year." But I've also been labeled a "maverick," and several less flattering names, too, by some of the biggest names in government and the health establishment - but hey, that's part of the territory. I've taken more than a few arrows in my time in order to get you the truth - without paying an arm and a leg for Band-aid "solutions" that will only make you sicker and promise to send you to an early grave.

Trust me - I know how confusing it can be to sift through all the baloney you're indundated with by greedy drug companies and mainstream medicine. That's why I'm happy to offer you this free report, The Fluoride Myth Busted.