The televised 30-minute debate in New Zealand between FAN Senior Advisor and co-author of The Case Against Fluoride, Paul Connett, PhD, and Professor Mike Berridge, PhD from the Malagan Institute, is now available on YouTube, or click the picture below to watch:

Journalist Cameron Bennett moderated the debate, which aired on Wednesday as part of the Thinking Green series on Sky Channel’s FACE-TV.

As Paul points out at the beginning of the debate, it has taken 12+ years of challenging NZ’s fluoridation proponents to a public debate to find someone willing to defend the practice.  So this is a rare event that we need to get as many people as possible to watch.  Please share this video on your social media pages, and with friends, family, and decision-makers via email.

A crucial moment during the debate–which should completely undermine the government’s plan to mandate fluoridation in NZ–is when Prof. Berridge uses a recent review by Gluckman and Skegg to underpin his claim that fluoridation is safe; something that NZ proponents have been repeating at every level.  Paul correctly points out that the review held in such esteem by proponents actually uses misleading language to hide a significant 7-point IQ difference between children with elevated exposure to fluoride and children without.  Not only did Paul reveal the fraudulent conclusions made by the review’s authors, but also revealed Prof. Berridge’s ignorance regarding the actual study he was relying upon to make his case.

Paul explained the mistake and cover-up made by Gluckman and Skegg in detail during his recent presentation in Christchurch, which can be viewed here.  Paul also wrote about the “junk science” review in a recent bulletin.

Prof. Berridge was also unfamiliar with the critique of the Broadbent IQ study on which he heavily relied upon to combat concerns regarding fluoride and IQ (see FAN’s critique of the study).  The journal in which the Broadbent study was published–the Journal of the American Public Health Association–later published a letter by Osmunson, Limeback, and Neurath, which repeated some of this criticism.

Please consider making a contribution to the GiveaLittle Fundraiser for Fluoride Free NZ’s TV ad campaign.  The more residents we can educate with these ads, the greater the momentum in opposition to fluoridation, and the greater the chance NZ citizens can defend their right to choose fluoride-free drinking water.  And we all know that a win or loss in NZ will impact fluoridation programs around the world as either an example of a worldwide trend against the practice, or a new strategy for expansion.

We received exciting news from Western Australia.  Campaigners have launched a Fluoride Free WA political party.  The objective is to field candidates in next year’s state elections.  The mere presence of this party, the thousands of ballot papers, as well as candidates discussing fluoridation throughout WA in the media and at events should contribute significantly to the general population’s understanding of our issue.  Because the truth is on our side, we know that simple awareness and consideration is 60% of the battle.

Western Australian campaigners are currently 550 registered members (must be WA based) away from the minimum number needed to field candidates in the election, and they need to get there by early October at the latest.

Residents of Western Australia can learn more about the political party here. The party membership form is here: