The following quotes come from professionals who signed the Statement Calling for an End to Water Fluoridation.

On August 9, 2007, the Fluoride Action Network released a statement calling for an end to fluoridation signed by over 600 professionals. Concurrent with its release, FAN made available the following quotes from some of the signers.


Click here to see the list of signers

Phillip M. Allen, MD, PhD, pathologist (retired), Wichita, KS:
“The health risks associated with the use of fluoride in drinking water outweigh, to a significant degree, the slight benefits from that use.”

James Allison, Licensed Water Operator & Ofice Manager, Carroll-Boone Water District, Eureka Springs, AR:
“All members of the Carroll-Boone Water District (Eureka Springs, AR) are opposed to fluoridation. No one in this country should have the right to mass medicate the public. Ingesting fluoride is an individual decision and should not be forced on our customers. It is JUST PLAIN WRONG!”

Richard V. Anthony, MS Public Administration, Principal, Richard Anthony Associates, Member of the Board of Directors California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA), Grass Roots Recycling Network (GRRN) and the Zero Waste International Alliance (ZWIA), San Diego, CA:
“My area of expertise is in recycling and I can’t imagine a worse example of recycling than the use of the hazardous scrubbing liquor from the fertilizer industry to fluoridate our water.”

Glen M. Bailes, Safety Manager/Licensed Water Operator, Carroll-Boone Water District, Eureka Springs, AR:
“Fluoride should be a consumer’s choice, not a mandatory Government requirement for all!”

James Beck, MD, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Medical Biophysics, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada:
“Fluoridating public water supplies is now demonstrated to be ineffective at preventing dental caries, to be toxic for various body systems and damaging to the development of the central nervous system. Furthermore, it is medically unethical because it is being approved by unqualified authorities, delivers an uncontrolled dose, without medical monitoring. All of this without the informed consent of recipients and without their ability to easily or cheaply avoid exposure once the fluoride is added to their drinking water.”

Gerhard Bedding, MA, MALS, Director NH Pure Water Coalition/NH Citizens for Health Freedom, Executive Committee Member Aurum Foundation (supporting natural health) and NH Chapter Sierra Club, Keene, NH:
“My main reasons for opposing fluoridation is that there is no scientifically rigorous evidence for its efficacy yet there is clear such evidence of its great harm to humans. Furthermore I object strenuously to having medication administered to me without my consent.”

Carol S. Berman, DDS, Norcross, GA:
“Most dentists who support water fluoridation do so because of what they were told in school and from their dental associations. Most don’t have the time or see the need to review the scientific studies or do any independent research on the subject. I know because I used to be one of them. If they took the time, as I have, to review unbiased research most would probably conclude that fluoride should be limited to topical application only and should never be added to drinking water.”

Rosalie Bertell, PhD, (Deceased), Regent of the Board, International Physicians for Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland, Retired President, International Institute of Concern for Public Health, Toronto, Canada:
“An additional reason which makes me oppose fluoridation of drinking water is the potential interaction between fluoride and various potent prescription medicines which people are taking. Most patients take their medicines with water, and the possible interactions between these pharmaceuticals and fluoride go untested.”

Russell L. Blaylock, MD, retired neurosurgeon and author, MS:
“I am opposed to fluoridation of drinking water because of the compelling and abundant amount of science demonstrating toxic effects on a number of cell signaling systems, energy enzymes and the subsequent harmful effects on the central nervous system – both during development and in the adult. There is also compelling evidence of brain accumulation of this toxic ion.”

Russ Borneman, DDS, Anacortes, WA:
“Recently the Skagit County (WA) Commissioners voted to Fluoridate the whole county. I am very frustrated since the media has helped blackball the effort to the extent to even ignore my letters and fail to cover public meetings that are to give information to the people. They then go on to print editorials from the health officer that state out and out lies.”

Ann Brameier, licensed acupuncturist, NY:
“I feel it is high time that all residents of NY be informed about the real dangers of fluoride so that we can all take control over our freedom to choose what we ingest.”

Clarence Brown, MD, Col USAR (Retired), Emergency Medicine, Internal Medicine, Natick, MA:
“There is significant evidence to suggest that the risks from the use of fluoride for prevention of tooth decay exceeds any questionable benefit that is achieved.”

Shirley M. Brown, RN (Retired), Natick, MA:
“I have been actively fighting fluoridation for 20 years while witnessing with horror its ghoulish consequences. Most memorable was the early death of an honest citizen suffering from polychondritis for whom fluoride was absolutely contraindicated. The shameful panorama of ignorance and pain that is linked to fluoridation must be put to a hasty end.”

Albert W. Burgstahler, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas. Co-author with George L. Waldbott, MD, and H. Lewis McKinney, PhD, of “Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma” (Coronado Press, 1978) and editor since 1998 of the international quarterly journal Fluoride, published by the International Society for Fluoride Research, Lawrence, KS.
“Why are so many public health officials afraid to admit they could be wrong about things they have stuck their neck out on? Does their desire to preserve their credibility mean more to them than the wellbeing and good health of their fellow citizens?”

Chester V. Clark, Jr., DDS, MPH, Mayor of Amity, AR:
“I am totally convinced, after believing otherwise for most of my professional career, that the whole idea of putting a known toxic substance into our drinking water is based on politics and government/industry collusion. It is long past time to put an end to this scientifically unproven practice and improve the health of the American people.”

Stephanie F. Cave, MD, Practiced medicine in Baton Rouge for 21 years, Baton Rouge, LA:
“Fluoride is a potent poison for enzymes. I cannot reconcile putting it into the water source or children’s mouths. Money has to be the motivation because it makes no sense otherwise.”

Noel Campbell, BDSc, LDS, FACNEM, FASID, Visiting Professor, Hope Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia:
“The risk/benefit ratio based on peer reviewed research is now too high to allow fluoridation of water.”

Paul Connett, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, St. Lawrence University and Executive Director of the Fluoride Action Network, Canton, NY:
“In my view, the three most telling arguments against fluoridation are:
1) governments shouldn’t do to everyone what a doctor cannot do to anyone, i.e. force an individual to take medication without their consent.”
2) The level of fluoride in mothers milk is so low (0.004 ppm), i.e. 250 times lower than the typical level added to water (1 ppm). If you believe in fluoridation you are essentially saying that nature screwed up on what a baby needs for healthy nutrition.
3) The concession by the CDC that fluoride’s predominant action is topical.
If it works on the outside of the tooth why on earth expose the whole body to this known toxic substance by putting it into the drinking water? Thus, when one learns that there is little decent science demonstrating that ingested fluoride is reducing tooth decay and there is a growing body of evidence that there are many health concerns, it not only adds scientific weight to these three very basic common sense and ethical arguments, but makes this practice even more preposterous.”

Douglas Cross, BSc, Cbiol, MIBiol, EurProBiol, Independent Consultant in Environmental Compliance and Forensic Ecology. Served five years as a Member of the UK Government’s ‘Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Foods, Consumer Products and the Environment’ (CoT) investigating the medical effects of chemical contamination of the public water supply, Cumbria, England:
“The purpose of water quality standards is to provide the best possible quality of water, not the worst permissible. In public health measures, the issue is not what is technically feasible but what is legally permissible; fluoridation is in violation of EU law and Article 3 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.”

Nancy Crumpacker, MD, retired oncologist, and advisor to Rachel’s Friends Breast Cancer Coalition, Portland, OR:
“As a retired oncologist noting the well studied risk of osteosarcoma, I agree that the continued support for this dangerous and ineffective prescription is based on money and saving face. I am appalled by the absence of informed consent when our medical culture has tried to move away from paternalistic actions.”

Ronnie Cummins, National Director, Organic Consumers Association, MN:
“The Organic Consumers Association supports a ban on water fluoridation. America’s 50 million health and environmental- minded organic consumers are not only concerned with the purity of their food, but the purity of their water as well. Ban water fluoridation now!”

Paula G. Davey, MD, Fellow of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, Board Certified in Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology, Ann Arbor, MI:
“I have seen 3 patients with fluoride sensitivity, not toxicity, as even minute exposures flared their symptoms. Two had severe inflammatory arthritis without deformity when seen. They were so sensitive that they could not be where fluorinated water was used nor around many of the other common sources of fluoride or fluorinated compounds. The third gentleman developed his sensitivity when a fluoride bomb exploded in the gun racks he kept in the barn. He had been advised to keep the bomb there to protect his guns from thieves. Unfortunately, he suffered from many chemical sensitivities before this. This fluorine/fluoride exposure appeared to have expanded his sensitivity to fluorine and chemical compounds containing it.
His symptoms included joint and muscle pain, fatigue and shortness of breath. All three of these patients had been forced to retire to northern Michigan where they could obtain a home with tap water from the Great Lakes or from a well that had not been treated and on an acreage to give them a buffer zone from others who used fluorinated products. They have to live a life isolated from any sources of fluoride which has led to their own isolation caused by this severe sensitivity. We call it a sensitivity but this term inadequately describes the degree of disability caused by fluoride when one is sensitized to it.”

Mark Diesendorf, PhD, Director, Sustainability Centre, Sydney, Australia:
“Fluoridation is unsafe, ineffective and unethical.” Dr. Diesendorf is the author of several important articles on fluoride including the groundbreaking 1986 article in Nature, “The Mystery of Declining Tooth Decay.” Mark is interviewed in a clip from Australian TV “Fluoride Dangers”

Sandra N. Duffy, BS, JD, Lawyer in Portland, Board President of Consumers for Dental Choice (Washington, DC), former board member of Oregon Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, Portland, OR:
“I am the Board President of Consumers for Dental Choice. Our mission is to abolish the use of mercury in dental fillings. We, like the Fluoride Action Network, fight parallel battles with the ADA, state dental associations, state regulatory boards, the FDA and NIDCR. We hope for the good fortune of having someone like Christopher Bryson write a book about our story. As a lawyer, I believe that there is a fundamental human right to water and that that right is impaired when government usurps our constitutional right to self determination by force-feeding the population with a drug that FDA refuses to regulate (as it refuses to regulate mercury amalgam dental fillings). I also have a 4-year-old granddaughter with diabetes insipidius. It causes her to be very thirsty and to drink large quantities of water as her medication wears off between doses (as much as two quarts in an hour). Of course her parents have household bottled water. But there are many people who cannot afford to buy water to avoid the dangers of tap water.”

John C. J. Eaton, MA (Cantab), MSI, F Inst D, England:
“I have actively opposed compulsory fluoridation for over 40 years. As a lawyer, I am only too well aware of how our individual freedoms are being continually threatened and eroded – and the freedom to refuse unwanted medication is one of the most important freedoms we enjoy. A totalitarian measure like fluoridation sets an extremely dangerous precedent, and opens up an avenue which we should simply not go down. The effect of fluorides on tooth enamel, and the effect of ingesting a cumulative enzyme poison, may well be a dental and a medical question respectively for the experts, but whether to use public water supplies for conveying medication to all consumers, irrespective of their needs and wishes, is an entirely ethical question, on which the opinion of the lowestpaid, least-educated manual worker should carry just as much weight as the most highly-qualified president of the Medical and Dental Professions. They are all waterconsumers and should all have an equal say in what poisons or medication they ingest.”

Lynn Howard Ehrle, MEd, Chair, International Science Oversight Board (a project of the Organic Consumers Association), Plymouth, MI:
“The Nuremberg Code (1947) sets out certain basic principles that must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts, and its first point clearly defines “informed consent.”
“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.’
Despite subsequent endorsements of the informed consent principle, entire populations continue to be exposed to a long list of environmental chemicals, including fluoridated water, pesticides and chemicals in food, without informed consent. In addition, seldom are patients advised of risks, however small, from medical X-rays, fluoroscopes and CT scans, all without informed consent. So the problem is universal, but fluoride is the only chemical that treats 2/3 of the U.S. population!”

Samuel S. Epstein, MD, Professor emeritus, Environmental & Occupational Medicine University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition, Chicago, IL:
“My objections to fluoridation include:
1. There is sound epidemiological evidence relating fluoride to bone cancer.
2. Drinking water is fluoridated with highly contaminated industrial fluoride waste, not chemically pure fluoride.
3. Very few other medically advanced nations fluoridate their water.
4. While fluoride may have some beneficial effects when applied directly to the
tooth’s surface, there is no quality scientific evidence that swallowing fluoride is effective.”

Diana L. Estberg, PhD, Chemistry, retired, Port Angeles, WA:
“As a professional chemist I spent the final 11 years of my career at the City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department in the Environmental Monitoring division. Unfortunately, without public consent, our water has been fluoridated here in Port Angeles, WA since early 2005, and even though two initiatives met the qualifications for a vote, the City Council and Washington Dental Services filed a lawsuit to stop the vote and the court agreed.
For me, the argument is simple — it is unethical to medicate people without their consent (and especially to use the public water system to do it!), and it’s criminal to use the public water supplies as a dumping ground for industry’s toxic waste. To pay them for the privilege is really a travesty. One doesn’t even need to go further than these issues, but the research evidence for serious health implications is very convincing. Too many ‘medical professionals’ and people in power suffer from the ‘my mind is made up–don’t confuse me with the facts mentality.’”

Doug N. Everingham, MB, BS, Australian Health Minister 1972-75, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia:
“Half a century ago, as a public medical officer and as a family doctor, I published support for fluoridation in my country following the U.S.A. example. When challenged, I spent hours studying evidence on both sides and became convinced that I was wrong.
Each passing decade has strengthened that view. Public water fluoridation breaks the near-universal toxicological precautionary principle that requires providers to prove medicator safety, not dissenters to prove medicator harm.“

Chris Ewan, Independent Water Consultant, Ballarat, Australia:
“Fluoridation compromises the core medical premise of “First, do no harm.” We are so lucky that the electrical union in Ballarat (Australia) decided against connecting the power to the fluoride dosing treatment plant. This act of independence can only give heart to all who oppose adding dangerous man-made chemicals to public water supplies.”

Ann Fonfa, President, The Annie Appleseed Project, Delray Beach, FL:
“I run an organization for people with cancer.
We are concerned about the use of fluoride in our drinking water. One concern is the heavy metal content of the highly contaminated industrial waste fluoride used in fluoridation. Cadmium for example, has already been implicated in the development of breast cancer. The other heavy metals are also cause for concern. We believe that people with suppressed or depressed immune systems (those under conventional cancer treatment, or those with cancer), are being adversely affected. We think future studies, when these areas are targeted, will demonstrate this.”

Rene W. Fonseca, licensed water operator, Carroll-Boone Water District, Eureka Springs, AR:
“I strongly oppose fluoridation of drinking water. Our mission is to provide pure and clean water to our customers.
It is time for the water industry to spread the truth about the harmful effects of adding fluoride to peoples’ drinking water.”

Richard G. Foulkes, MD, Abbotsford, B.C., Canada:
“When I acted as health consultant for the British Columbian government, I was presented the case for fluoridation by civil servants in the health department and I supported the practice. When, however, I examined the scientific literature for myself, I was appalled that I had been taken in by such a one-sided presentation. I have now studied the fluoride literature and have attended International Conferences of the ISFR for the past 15 years and condemn the practice of water fluoridation without reservation.”

Anthony Fox, MD, New Milton, Hants, England:
“I am totally against water fluoridation by any country on this planet. There is a HUGE body of scientific evidence AGAINST fluoridation.”

Sheila L. M. Gibson, MD, BSc, MFHom, Member of the Advisory panel for the York Review. Medical advisor to UK Councils Against Fluoridation, Glasgow, Scotland:
“My own personal published research shows that fluoride has an adverse effect on the immune system.”

Jerzy O. Giedwoyn, MD, FACC, Cardiology and Internal Medicine, Gresham, OR:
“I support a ban on fluoridation. It is being used as a drug to treat entire populations with a questionable small benefit and definite potential for harm. It can hurt different groups of people to different degrees.”

Paul Gilbert, DDS, MAGD, Practicing general dentist focusing on biological dentistry, Princeton, NJ:
“It’s really an irony that the American Dental Association (ADA) relies on old, outdated “science” to support its pro fluoride position, and then has the nerve to say that we use “junk science.” I believe that the ADA is now about as professionally corrupt as it can get. The ADA is an embarrassment to real research scientists.”

George Gioumousis, PhD, Theoretical Chemistry, University of Wisconsin, 1955 (retired), Palo Alto, CA:
“I realized that the practice was completely false and deceptive when my wife brought home a copy of the pamphlet on Fluoride and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
After reading the article it was very clear to me that we had been deceived and misled. It is clear that the honest scientific research that has been done on the effects of fluoride on the body all validates the basic truth that fluoride compounds are very toxic substances. We should avoid them as assiduously as we try to avoid exposure to mercury, arsenic and lead which have the same level of acute toxicity as fluoride compounds.”

Veronica Griffin, PhD, MD, Director, Nutri-Concepts Clinics – Nutritional and Environmental Medicine and Chemical Detox, Cairns, Queensland, Australia:
“Fluoridation is poisoning our environment! If fluoride actually stopped cavities, why are we seeing an increase in cavities in largely fluoridated Australia today?”

Barry Groves, PhD (nutritional science), Author of “Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death?”, England:
“When I was researching my book, I was astonished by the utter lack of knowledge within the dental profession (in the UK), and with their apparent unwillingness even to consider trying to find out the truth of this measure. Furthermore, isn’t medication without consent contrary to UN human rights legislation?”

Andrew Harms, BDS, Air Force dentist (1978-83), private practice (1983-present), member of the Australian Dental Association, President of South Australia ADA, 1996, Adelaide, South Australia:
Water fluoridation is an outdated and dangerous practice. The systemic consequences are being recklessly overlooked in the name of preventive dentistry.”

William Harris, MD, Retired Emergency Physician, Honolulu, HI:
“The cause of dental caries is not fluoride deficiency, but the consumption of candy, soft drinks, and other fermentable sugars, which stick to the teeth and nourish the Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacilli which elaborate the organic acids that erode the dental enamel. Over-consumption of these empty calories is most prevalent among the same underprivileged children who not only have the highest caries incidence, but the highest obesity rates as well. Adding fluoride to the water does not solve either problem but since ~99% of the fluoride added to municipal water will never reach anyone’s teeth, water fluoridation would be a spectacularly inefficient strategy, even if it worked, and posed neither toxicological nor ethical concerns.” – Fluoride Action Network – August 2007 9

James A. Harrison, DDS, FAGD, retired dentist, Lake Worth, FL:
“I have first hand observations of individuals who suffer from fluoride. One woman has deep bone pain from just bathing in fluoridated water.”

Jennifer N. Hersh, PhD, Art History, independent Art Historian, Brooklyn, NY :
“I am not in a medical field or an environmental field but I do have a PhD and am well versed on the subject of fluoridation and know what a dangerous practice it is.”

David R. Hill, PEng, Professor Emeritus, University of Calgary, Research consultant & Scientific Auditor for Canadian government programs (SR&ED & NSERC) providing financial support to industry and universities, Calgary, Alberta, Canada:
“The excerpt below is from an article I wrote in 1997, entitled ‘Fluoride: Risks and Benefits? Disinformation in the Service of Big Industry.’ Nothing that has happened since has led me to weaken these assertions but rather to reinforce them, especially the publication of Chris Bryson’s brilliant book, ‘The Fluoride Deception.’
‘There is evidence that both individual and institutional fluoride promoters have stacked the deck, manipulated experimental results, suppressed evidence that spoke against their view, and victimized or smeared those who spoke out against them. When old ways and knowledge are increasingly found to be based on false premises, incompetence, bias and worse, it is important to re-examine the old claims, and to take account of the growing body of research that show they are at best equivocal and at worst completely opposite to the truth, and based on vested interest.
Fluoride promotion often proceeds with no understanding of the scientific method and sometimes without even the ability to perform simple arithmetic. The most important US Congress-mandated study (NTP, 1990) in recent times on the suspected connection between fluoride and cancer was subjected to a series of Public Health Service review stages that successively downgraded the results from the original independent laboratory study to the point where they were declared “equivocal” and largely ignored. The proven association of fluoride and water fluoridation with increased hip fractures and reduced bone quality has been denied or downplayed. Many other lines of investigation have been ignored or not followed up in an open-minded manner.
Medical ethics, morality, economics, legal and political issues have not deterred fluoride promoters in their efforts. Indeed, the problem has been declared a legislative matter, rather than under the jurisdiction of courts of law which might introduce such notions as ethics and reasonableness. The main beneficiaries from fluoride use are the big industries that find a profitable outlet for their otherwise embarrassing toxic byproducts. It is time for change.’
Those who would like a pdf file of my paper can do so by emailing me at>.”

Brook Hinckley, BMetE (Bachelor of Metallurgical Engineering), Principal Metallurgist, Sydney, NSW, Australia:
“I have seventeen years professional experience as a metallurgist and have worked in laboratories for much of this time. Anyone who has worked in a laboratory is trained that hydrofluoric acid is the most dangerous substance that you can come across in the laboratory. In my current position, I have also come across fluorosilicic acid and it is just as dangerous and, I might add, quite costly to dispose of. I help design alloys to resist wear & corrosion in the Mining & Fertiliser Industries; fluoride-containing liquors are extremely corrosive. When fluoride is present in the liquor for an application, the alloy has to be so much more corrosion resistant. It’s no secret.”

J. William Hirzy, PhD, Vice-President, EPA Headquarters Professionals Union (NTEU Chapter 280), risk assessment expert and (for identification purposes only) ranking chemist at EPA headquarters, Washington, DC:
“Its hard for me as a career EPA scientist to reconcile my Agency’s justifiable pride in its accomplishments in protecting public health and the environment with statements like the one made in 1984 by then Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water Rebecca Hanmer in which she, on behalf of EPA, endorses dumping the toxic and corrosive industrial waste product fluosilicic acid (sic) into America’s drinking water systems as a cheap fluoridating agent. For EPA in this way to play the “good federal soldier” promoting the national policy of water fluoridation at the cost of the Agency’s soul is a repulsive Faustian bargain I want no part of.”

Wael Hmaidan, Environmental Policy Advisor, Currently Executive Director of IndyAct, a global league of independent activists, Previous Greenpeace campaigner for the Arab World, Beirut, Lebanon:
“I think Margaret Mead’s quote applies to the anti-fluoridation campaign as it does to many others: ‘Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, concerned citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.’”

F. Owen Hoffman, PhD, President and Director, SENES Oak Ridge, Inc, Center for Risk Analysis, Oak Ridge, TN:
“After careful study of the recent NRC/NAS report that concluded that EPA’s standards for fluoride in drinking water lack an ample margin of safety, and having been informed by my colleague Dr. Thiessen about the weak epidemiological evidence for health benefits contrasted with the real potential for detrimental health impacts in highly sensitive individuals exposed to fluoride in public drinking water supplies, I support the worldwide effort to end water fluoridation. We need a renewed effort to make the public, the scientific and medical establishment, public health officials, local communities and national leaders aware of the issues surrounding ubiquitous fluoridation of public drinking water supplies.”

Professor C. Vyvyan Howard, MB, ChB, PhD, FRCPath, Bioimaging Research Group, Centre for Molecular Bioscience, University of Ulster, Coleraine, Northern Ireland and newly elected President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE):
“I’m against fluoridation: it’s a ridiculous idea, based on very bad science.”

Councillor Lisa Intemann, BA(Hons), BAppSc, Community Development worker of 30 years, Wauchope, NSW, Australia:
“No one likes having been wrong. But for the sake of the children we must admit we were wrong about this and end it now.”

Robert L. Isaacson, PhD, Distinguished Professor, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY. Member of the 2006 National Research Council panel which reviewed the toxicology of fluoride, Binghamton, NY:
“The health of the entire country is at risk as long as fluoridation of the drinking water remains uncurbed.”

Doris M. Jones, MSc, Independent Researcher, Co-Editor of Environmental Issues Forum (EIF), Ilford, Essex, England:
“The German Association of Gas and Water Employers (which was asked to put fluoride into water supplies) prepared a detailed report in 1975 considering all then available evidence. After analyzing the data, supported by 485 references, they rejected fluoridation on 8 counts concluding that water fluoridation was: foreign to nature, unnecessary, unsatisfactory, illegal (according to 2 basic German laws), irresponsible, harmful to the environment, uncontrollable and inefficient. [Dokumentation zur Frage der Trinkwasser-Fluoridierung, DVGW Schriftenreihe, Wasser, Nr. 8, 1975]. – Nothing has changed, but since 1975 there has been more evidence of the ineffectiveness of water fluoridation in preventing tooth decay and of much harm it causes to human and animal health, as well as to the environment.”

Emily Kane, ND, LAc, Author, Managing Menopause Naturally, Member of mayoral commission to re-examine risk/benefit of fluoridation, Juneau, AK:
“I recently served on a city council appointed by the mayor to study the issue of fluoridation. Based on 2 years of studying the literature and closely examining the 2006 NAS/NRC report, the council persuaded the Assembly members of Juneau (Alaska) to remove fluoride from the city water. My particular interest was the effect of fluoride on IQ. Recent Chinese studies show a significant reduction of IQ in children drinking water with high natural fluoride levels (compared to children in low fluoride communities). Fluoride is also very bad for thyroid function; hyperthyroidism (Graves disease) used to be treated with fluoride, but this treatment was abandoned because of it being too toxic.”

Junji Kato, MD, PhD, director of Miyachiyo Kato clinic, director, Japan Temperance Union, member of Medwatcher, Japan:
“We should notice the fact that only 1% of fluoride added into the drinking water would be drunk by the community people and about 99% would flow away into the environment. I have read the NRC report on “Fluoride in Drinking Water” published in 2006 and I am very concerned about the adverse health effects identified at low fluoride levels.”

Jong-Chul Kim, Editor, Green Review, South Korea:
“For many years I have been involved in questioning the wisdom of water fluoridation in Korea. So far, I have not met any scientifically and politically reliable justification to support this so-called public health policy. As far as I know, there is nothing to justify water fluoridation except for vested interests such as the American-influenced dental profession, public health bureaucrats and dishonest scientists. Water fluoridation should be stopped.”

Ruth Greenwood Koss, RN, MS, retired school nurse in the public school system in Somerville, NJ:
“Our school dentist screened and recorded the elementary school students annually. In my opinion, during the thirty years I assisted in dental screening there appeared to be little or no evidence of benefit from fluoridation.”

Richard A. Kunin, MD, President, Society for Orthomolecular Health-Medicine, San Francisco, CA:
“Our organization, the Society for Orthomolecular Health-Medicine, took a position against fluoridation in 1996 . The claims of the pro-fluoride political establishment are deceptive and unscientific. At a time when the whole world is concerned about carbon dioxide pollution, it is incredible that our public health officials are still in denial about the proven environmental and medical dangers of fluoridation. How unscientific can you get. And since when does the medical profession abandon its traditional vow: “first, do no harm.” The risk benefit ratio of fluoride is almost never discussed in medical circles. Unbelievable–except that Western Medicine is also in denial about the primary importance of nutrition in maintaining health and treating disease. Also unbelievable!”

James A. Gruber, former water superintendent, Lakeview Park Water Association (retired after 24 years service), near Soap Lake, WA:
“In Lakeview Park, we are fortunate to have 3 deep wells which don’t even need chlorination and are, of course, not fluoridated. I have been opposed to fluoridation since 1964. I am also opposed to mercury in dental fillings and vaccinations. I had 16 (4 under gold crowns) and had them properly replaced with composite fillings in May 1991 and chelation detox by a naturopath. I was headed for Alzheimer’s disease but my health store owner friend sold me “Its All In Your Head” by Hal Huggins, DDS, MS which motivated me to go to a toxic-free dentist.”

Gilles Leroux, BSc, MSc, Biologie, ND, Montréal, Québec, Canada:
“I am against all fluoridation in water. It causes more harm than good. There’s a lot of research that reveals the fact there is no need to put fluoride in water. We have to stop all fluoridation.”

Hardy Limeback, PhD, DDS, Assoc. Professor and Head of Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto, past president of the Canadian Association for Dental Research, and Member of the 2006 National Research Council panel which reviewed the toxicology of fluoride, Mississauga, Canada:
“For the last 15 years I have carried out research showing what damage fluoride accumulation can do to human teeth and bones. At the same time, it is obvious that the benefit of fluoridation is next to nil. After spending 3 years on the US National Research Council panel reviewing the damage that fluoride can do to other tissues, I am even more convinced that fluoride should be banned as a systemic drug (which includes water fluoridation) and classified as a prescription drug for topical use on teeth that only dentists can prescribe.”

Gary Liss, BSc, MPA, Zero Waste consultant (President of Gary Liss & Associates), CRRA Recycler of the Year (2005), and Member of Recyclers Global Warming Council, Zero Waste for Global Cooling coalition, Global Recycling Council, and Zero Waste International Alliance, Loomis, CA:
“A key link between this issue and my work is one of producer responsibility or, rather, the lack of it. This is another example where an industry has figured out a way to eliminate their responsibility for the waste they make, in a way that evidently has major ramifications. We should ask a Congressional Hearing to apply the precautionary principle to the use of the phosphate fertilizer industry’s contaminated silicon fluoride waste as an additive to municipal water supplies.”

Mark S. Lohbauer, JD, former member of the Board of Directors of the NJ Grassroots Environmental Organization, Pennsauken, NJ:
“I consider the practice of mandatory dosage of any medication–let alone this hazardous substance–to be a violation of civil rights. No one in a free society should be forced to take a medication that they do not want to take.”

Jennifer Luke, PhD, BDS, Dentist and fluoride researcher, England:
“My work showed that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland and lowers melatonin production in animals. I find it extraordinary that no government promoting fluoridation has chosen to pursue these worrying findings. The ADA, which has deep pockets, and claims to be promoting human health, should fund research into this matter and throw more light on the issue.”

L. R. B. Mann, PhD, (rtd) Senior Lecturer in Environmental Studies, University of Auckland, New Zealand:
“As one of John Colquhoun’s supervisors for his PhD on fluoridation, I am glad to add my name to the Professionals’ statement calling for an end to fluoridation. The evidence strongly suggests there is no benefit from systemic (as opposed to topical) fluoride. The harm from fluoridation is real, at least with dental fluorosis; and the evidence for other, more harmful side effects is worrying enough that, in the absence of significant benefit, fluoridation should be stopped.”

Peter John Mansfield, MA, MB, B Chir FRSA, Family Doctor and independent scientist, member of the Advisory Board for the Systematic Review of Public Water Fluoridation conducted by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York (known as “The York Review”, McDonagh et al., 2000), Newark on Trent, England:
“UK national data from 2003 indicate that 20% of the UK population (only 10% fluoridated) already consumes more fluoride than the UK Department of Health considers safe.” – See British TV program featuring the work of Dr. Mansfield

Victor A. Marcial-Vega, MD, Oncologist, Member, Public and Environmental Health Committee, Puerto Rico College of Physicians and Surgeons, San Juan, PR:
“I have found that the most important factor to keep the teeth and the whole body healthy is to stay alkaline. When the saliva is acidic, that is when problems start. Fluoride is a toxic compound that I do not recommend in our water.”

Avery N. Martin, BS, DC, Mt. Vernon, WA:
“I have been a chiropractor for over 30 years and followed this subject for that length of time. I have two sons who are also chiropractors and we teach all our patients that this is poor public health policy. Water fluoridation policy seems to be another good example where profit and politics outweigh science and public well-being.”

Elizabeth McDonagh, BSc (Hons), Cert Ed, Former college lecturer in food studies and applied science (retired), Chair, National Pure Water Association, England:
“National Pure Water Association was founded in 1960 by the then Lord Douglas of Barloch. The fact that no new fluoridation schemes have been implemented in the UK since 1985 has been in no small way influenced by the unstinting efforts of NPWA’s officers, members and supporters at home and abroad. The addition of fluorosilicic acid to public water supplies is presented as a means of preventing tooth decay. This makes fluoridated water, by EU definition, medication. As individual consent is clearly not sought, fluoridation involves the abuse of everyone’s human right to refuse medication.”

Tony McDonald, RN, Christchurch, New Zealand:
“Over the past few years I have become increasingly enlightened and alarmed by this insidious practice and I am likewise enlightening colleagues as opportunities present themselves.”

Peter Meiers, author of “Toxizitaet von Fluorverbindungen” (1984) and of several articles on fluoride toxicity in medical journals, Saarbruecken, Germany:
“I am opposed to fluoridation because there is more valid scientific evidence for fluoride toxicity than for its alleged caries-protective effect. The strange history of the measure ( is additional proof of this.”

Howard W. Mielke, PhD, Environmental Toxicologist, Chemistry Department, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA:
“As an active researcher of environmental toxicology and children’s health I was once a believer in the value of adding fluoride to water. Then I became acquainted with David Kennedy, DDS, and he presented information about fluorosis and introduced me to FAN and scientific research. I was appalled by my lack of understanding and knowledge about fluorides and their impact on health. We should be protecting the public from systemic exposure to this toxin and not adding it to public water supplies.“

Terrence A. Messerman, DDS, Past President, The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology:
“It’s time that this practice, which began with The Manhattan Project, be revealed for what it truly is: a travesty against the health of the public.“

Rosemary Grace Minervini, RDH, MS, Retired Dental Hygienist, Master’s Degree in Dental Hygiene Administration, Education and Research, Lehi, UT:
“Countless peer-reviewed scientific research publications show that the risks of fluoridation far outweigh any claims of its so called benefits.”

Jerry Mittelman, DDS, Past-president of The International Academy of Preventive Medicine, publisher The Holistic Dental Digest PLUS, NY:
“I have had considerable experience with this issue. A book I co-authored “Healthy Teeth for Kids” condemns fluoride. Our newsletter the Holistic Dental Digest PLUS continues to inform the public on fluoride’s dangers and as Past-president of The International Academy of Preventive Medicine, I’m very familiar with the ‘politics’ of the problem.”

Hans Moolenburgh, MD, Author, “Fluoride: The Freedom Fight,” (Mainstream pub., Edinburgh, 1987) Haarlem, Netherlands:
“I have been in this battle since 1968. It is utterly strange that while fluoridation is scientifically as outdated as the idea that the earth is flat, it is still going on in parts of the world and still propagated. Fluoridation was forbidden in our country in 1976 by law, and since the 1980s even in the constitution, thanks to a new article for the protection of human integrity (I helped bring that article in). We must hope that, while madness may occur during a certain period, in the end a sane attitude will be restored.”

Ralph W. Moss, PhD, author of numerous books and articles on cancer therapy, including the “The Cancer Industry” creator of a website and newsletter on alternative and conventional cancer therapy, President of Cancer Communications, Lemont, PA:
“Although I support proper public health measures, I have serious misgivings about the fluoridation of public water supplies. I am strongly against forcible medication when there is a logical, safe, targeted alternative. Fluoride supplements are available by prescription, so parents may administer fluoride in a controlled way – something that cannot be said for fluoridated water supplies, since concentrations vary and are subject to human error. Overdosing can and does occur. No one really knows exactly how much each child is getting since it depends very much on how much an individual child drinks and how much fluoride he or she is getting from swallowed toothpaste and foods and drinks, aside from the fluoridated water supply. There is now evidence that fluoride intake is associated with an increased incidence osteosarcoma. This alone should give us pause.”

Alan Muller, Executive Director, Green Delaware, Port Penn, DE:
“Public health (dental) officials, led by the Federal health bureaucracy, peddle the idea that fluoridation is a solution to the absence of proper dental care for poor kids, who are often loaded with caries due to a poor diet and lack of preventive care. In all the years they have been doing this, somehow these officials haven’t felt an obligation to design and fund proper dental care delivery programs for everyone. When treatment is provided, all too often it takes the form of mercury amalgam fillings.
How unconscionable: “Our” public health officials are toxifying kids with two of the most potent poisons we know about: fluoride and mercury. It’s a no-brainer: No person, especially no child, anywhere, should be intentionally exposed to toxins such as fluoride and mercury. EVERY ONE should have access to regular preventative dental care. The overall cost of doing this would be far less than the (present) cost of NOT doing it.”

Gerald Natzke, DO, President, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, Wichita, KS:
“By request of David Kennedy, DDS and subsequently John L. Wilson, Jr., MD, the board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) was queried as to their desire to back the Professionals’ statement calling for an end to the use of fluoridation in drinking water. The board voted unanimously to support this opposition. The AAEM has passed a resolution of its own that follows this line of thought on fluoride use in water. We applaud the efforts of the Fluoride Action Network in helping to bring an end to the longstanding, ill conceived and poorly documented toxic exposure citizens of the US impart on themselves by drinking treated water.”

David J. Ogle, MD, Medical Director, the Center for Environmental Medicine, Portland, OR:
“I have been in practice 10 years and know of no other issue, except the criminal use of amalgam, that surpasses the fluoride issue. The science is in, but unfortunately those legislators who make the decisions are ‘out to lunch.’ We need to shorten their lunch period and have them ‘fast’ on fluoride.”

Bill Osmunson, DDS, MPH, Director, the Institute for Comprehensive Dental Studies. Dental practitioner and educator for 30 years with active practices in Bellevue, WA and Lake Oswego, OR. Host, of the Cable TV Series, “The Doctor’s Corner”, Portland, OR:
“When comparing countries, states, or counties, dental decay rates are similar regardless of fluoridation status. With little or no benefit, any cost is unacceptable. The huge increase in dental fluorosis (a third of US children now impacted) no doubt contributed to the ADA and CDC recommending infants not receive fluoridated water.
Warnings for other subgroups will undoubtedly follow. Fluoridation promoters try to brush off dental fluorosis as simply a cosmetic concern, however, appearance alone has led many to seek cosmetic corrections which can have a per person life time cost of over $100,000. Dental fluorosis is just one of many public health risks from fluoridation. Fluoridation is one of the 20th century’s greatest public health mistakes and must be stopped.”

Ian E. Packington, MA Cert Tox, Independent Science Adviser to National Pure Water Association [NPWA], York, England:
“Fluoridation goes on today regardless of demonstrated adverse human health consequences. It must be stopped – but we will have achieved a true landmark victory for human health and the well-being of our planet only when all harmful fluoride pollution has been eliminated.”

Jamie D. Page, BSc, MBA, Chief Executive, The Cancer Prevention and Education Society, Canary Wharf, London, England:
“Adding fluoride to water is medication without informed consent and should simply not be allowed”

Geoff Pain, PhD, Lecturer in Science, University of Notre Dame, Environmental Consultant, Member of the Western Australia Environment Minister’s Panel of Experts, Member of the Australian Labor Party Environment and Conservation Policy Committee, Perth, Western Australia:
“The impact of fluoride on IQ and its neurotoxicity is confirmed by a number of studies. This should be troubling for Australians, if the media or the government informed them about the matter, because 12,000,000 kg of fluoride compounds are dumped into Australian water every year as well as 350,000 kg to air (Source National Pollutant Inventory Summary Report 2004-05).”

Gilles Parent, ND, author of “L’inconséquence de la Fluoration,” 1975 and co-author of “La fluoration autopsie d’une erreur scientifique,” 2005, member de l’Association de diplômés en naturopathie du Québec. (The association has taken a position against fluoridation and it is a member of «Front commun pour une eau saine»), St. Laurent (Montreal), Quebec, Canada:
“The Quebec Public Health Authority claimed officially on their internet site that there were 27,000 scientific studies supporting fluoridation. When we confronted them on this figure, they admitted that they did not have a list of those studies and and that they were unable to supply any valid source on which they based their declaration. Thus, the Quebec Public Health Authority’s claim constitutes a scientific fraud.” The York review (McDonagh et al., 2000) could find only 3,246 studies (both for and against) and only 214 of these met their scientific criteria.”

Kalpana Patel, MD, FAAP, FAAEM, pediatrician, practicing specialist in Environmental medicine:
“As a practicing specialist in Environmental Medicine and pediatrician I don’t encourage contamination of water with fluorine compounds, a practice which is a threat to human health, especially young children.”

Robert Pocock, fluoridation spokesperson for VOICE OF IRISH CONCERN for the Environment, Dublin, Ireland:
“The Irish government compulsorily adds an industrial pollutant and hazardous chemical, fluorosilicic acid, to public drinking water in the name of dental health. This invasive medical intervention is rejected by almost all of the European Union’s twentyfive member states in favor of safer alternatives which achieve similar or lower levels of child tooth decay. Fluoridation of Irish drinking water is environmentally objectionable, politically perverse and morally indefensible.” – See Irish TV News debate with Robert Pocock

Marcia Poe, RDH, MS, CNS, Dental Hygienist, Nutritionist and College Instructor, Belton, MO:
“Having been a wet-fingered hygienist for over four decades, I have been on both sides of this fence. We were not taught any downsides to fluoridation in hygiene school and I went to debates about fluoridation when first out of college. I was on the pro-fluoridation side. But when in my masters program, the biochemistry instructor said, “All biochemists know that if you want to denature proteins in the lab, you use fluoride.”
All enzymes are proteins and enzymes make possible all of the work done in our bodies for our survival. It doesn’t make sense to risk fluorosis, thyroid issues, and a possible increased risk of osteosarcoma in adolescent males, in order to prevent a cavity or two in a lifetime! It is not a good trade-off in my book! Systemic use has not proven effective anyway.
As a guardian of oral health and a grandmother, I feel there should be a ‘right-toknow’ for patients and parents whenever fluoride is used or recommended. There are contraindications for many, especially to those with heart or kidney issues. There is no dosage regulation for something so toxic and especially risky for those of small body size…our children, petite women, and our pets.” Healthcare workers are professionals who are given the responsibility to safeguard the health of the population, according to scientific evidence, not according to the politics of healthcare. “Let the truth be known!”

Michael D. Porteus, RPh, Staff pharmacist, Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH:
“As someone completing a Master’s degree in pharmacy, it surprises me greatly as to how some health care professionals can exempt fluoride from a central ethical principle of medicine. It is this: for any drug or medical procedure, people as consumers must be made aware of the risks. I find it truly intolerable that we are mass-medicating our population without their sound understanding and consent on this matter.”

Grace S. Prince, MS, RD, LDN, dietitian consultant in private practice, Nashville, TN:
“As a consultant dietitian in private practice I have assessed the nutritional status of patients for over forty years. I see the ill effects of fluoride on the body and the health issues it presents.”

Romeo Quijano, MD, Manilla, Philippines:
“Fluoridating the public water supply violates the fundamental right of citizens to health and a healthful environment. The risks associated with water fluoridation definitely far outweigh the supposed benefits.”

Philip Robertson, BHSc, ND, a Naturopath from Australia, formerly lecturer in Health Sciences at Victoria University, currently a consultant in functional pathology testing, Carmoora Clinic, Geelong, Australia:
“When I was working as a naturopath in fluoridated Melbourne, patients reported adverse effects from the newly fluoridated water. But I was told by Victorian state health officials that there was no evidence of side effects from fluoridated water. However, repeated medical testing confirmed the side effects. Government doctors then said they didn’t believe the tests were right.
When they were asked to do their own tests, after evaluating the patient, one government doctor was still able to refuse doing the proposed test ironically by pointing to the risk to her health if they tested her with fluoridated water! The Victorian government seems more intent on protecting Victoria’s Fluoridation Act, than the health of Victoria’s citizens. When government and their dental advisors see scientific truth about fluoride as the enemy, our health care system is badly compromised.” – See Australian TV report on fluoride with Philip

Michael B. Rogers, DDS, Arlington, VA:
“Swallowing fluoride in drinking water is like swallowing a band-aid for a cut. Why not just put the band-aid only where you need it?”

Ralph Anthony Ryder, Director, Communities Against Toxics UK, Editor, TOXCAT, Ellesmere Port, England:
“I attended a interview on Manchester breakfast TV when Dr. Paul Connett had been invited to comment on fluoridation. Also invited was Economist Guy Harkin of the North West Fluoridation Evaluation, a group which will be making a recommendation on whether to add fluoride to the drinking water of Manchester. Even though Harkin’s recommendations will be very influential on whether Manchester fluoridates its water, he demonstrated little knowledge or even interest in the science indicating fluoride’s health risks and simply regurgitated parrot-fashion the pro-fluoride script.
When asked, off camera, if he had read the latest 500 page report from the US National Research Council he replied, after some spluttering “I have read a summary.” But when asked “What were the conclusions?” Harkin couldn’t answer. It was obvious to me that he hadn’t even read the summary of the report. In fact, I doubt he knew of its existence.
The blind ignorance of the pro-fluoride lobby has to be seen to be believed.”

Dr. Andrew Rynne, LRCP&SI, MICGP, Medical Practitioner and columnist for the Irish Medical News, founder of Clane General Hospital, Co. Kildare, Ireland:
“Nobody should ever be forced to take medicine against their wishes.”

Bittu Sahgal, Editor, Sanctuary magazine, Mumbai, India:
“Each human being is unique. Nature has an unique relationship with each one of us. The ‘one size fits all’ fluoridation formula amounts to ‘poisoning Peter to pay Paul’ and that is nothing short of immoral.”

Karl Sandberg, MD, Ola, AR:
“From a medication standpoint, even if fluoride were not a poison, adding it to the water supply is idiotic. I can’t believe supposedly rational people are in favor of this.”

Mages Mageswari Sangaralingam, Masters in Environmental Management, Research Officer, Consumers Association of Penang, Malaysia:
“Fluoridation is mass medication with an uncontrolled dose, and violates the individual’s right to informed consent. We need to end the harmful practice of water fluoridation in the US and all other countries which still add fluoride in public drinking water.”

Karilee H. Shames, PhD, RN, Advance Practice Holistic Nurse and Richard L. Shames, MD, 35 years GP experience, co-authors ”Feeling Fat, Fuzzy or Frazzled?” and “Thyroid Power”, San Rafael, CA:
“As practitioners helping people with hormone balance for 30 years, it is our strong feeling that fluoridation is a contributing factor to the massive epidemic of low thyroid function affecting tens of millions of Americans. We consider fluoridation to be one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated upon the American public, up there with estrogen supplementation for all women. Shame on the ADA and the CDC! As we say in our recent book, FEELING FAT, FUZZY OR FRAZZLED,” ‘Fluoridation is simply a bad idea whose time has passed.’”

Paul G. Slack, BS Industrial Engineering, Grade IV Water Treatment Operator License, Manager, Mount Desert Water District, Northeast Harbor, ME:
“I am proud to tell you that our water district led the fight to get fluoride out of Northeast Harbor’s water. The result was that in a local referendum we won by 229 to 42 votes and we became the first community in Maine to stop fluoridation. We would like to help other communities in Maine get it out”

Mary Shomon, Leading thyroid patient advocate and best-selling author of the “Thyroid Diet”:
“Fluoride ingestion increases the risk for thyroid disease, among many health concerns. Given the epidemic of thyroid problems, as a patient advocate, I’m convinced that our health is far better served by minimizing the intake of this unnecessary toxin.”

Alan B. Shrank, MD, FRCP (UK), consultant physician, medical advisor to UK Councils Against Fluoridation, England:
“Even the original wartime studies, which claimed to prove that water fluoridation reduced dental caries, were so flawed in their design that no editor of today’s medical journals would publish them. No study since has provided grade A evidence that ingested fluoride reduces tooth decay by any significant amount.”

Alfred A. Siess, Jr., BCE, MBA, Environmental/Economic Consultant, Ret. Engineering Executive, Lehigh Valley, PA:
“When I studied fluoridation as a Civil Engineering student 52 years ago, very little was taught about the health effects of fluoride. In my opinion, those ‘professionals’ who advocate fluoridation of the public water supply as ‘safe and effective’ when the whole body of scientific evidence shows it is neither, should lose their professional license and should NOT be shielded from civil suits or criminal liability where fluoridated water causes damage.”

Carol Skeggs, RN, retired, Mackay, Queensland, Australia:
“I have seen obvious symptoms of fluoride illness in my own children [gastrointestinal/ fluorosis/bones] which began several months after I was advised to give them fluoride tablets and fluoridated toothpaste when very young. The illnesses were mysterious and took a long while to diagnose. They are still slowly recovering from childhood exposure to fluoride even though many years have passed and one still has elevated fluoride in her blood. Since my early nursing days, I have always been totally against using any poison that isn’t necessary for good health and this opinion has been dramatically reinforced by our family experience.”

Brian J. Smith, DDS, Eureka, CA:
“Aside from endorsing Paul Connett’s 50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation, I am concerned about the total exposure of my patients, my community, the environment, and most importantly the children, including my two and a half year old son. At the very least, I feel what supplements or medicines one ingests should be a personal choice.”

Kristine L. Soly, MD, FACC, holistic cardiologist, Yarmouthport, MA:
“Under any circumstances, I would disapprove of adding any drug to our drinking water, especially one so toxic and controversial as fluoride.”

Charlie Spencer, Radio broadcaster (35 years), environmental film maker and advocate, Chairman (1993 – 1999), National Ecology Commission, Secular Franciscan Order (SFO), USA, and editor of the Commission’s newsletter, “The Guardian of Creation,” Springfield, MA:
“It amazes me how the public can be made to believe that the disposal of a hazardous waste in their public water supply can be good for their health.”

Prof. Joerg Spitz, Managing Director of the Society for Medical Information and Prevention in Germany, Wiesbaden, Germany:
“Referring to many articles by different authors (e.g. Niloufer Chinoy, Anna Strunecka and Rudolf Ziegelbecker) there is no room for deliberately distributing a highly problematic substance like fluoride over the whole country by water fluoridation. In my opinion, fluoride is worsening the problems arising from the lack of micronutrients and antioxidants in Western diets! We were lucky in Europe and especially in Germany that fluoridation was never widely accepted. Even those cities which decided to apply water fluoridation years ago, like Basel in Switzerland, have since stopped it”

Janet Tallon, Retired nurse, Bundaberg, Queensland, Australia:
“I object to the unsolicited medication by the state of an entire population with any substance on principle. The health implications are well documented over a long period and should be more than enough warning to the powers that be that they are entering a minefield fraught with litigation and disease processes caused by the ingestion of fluoride.”

Dick Thom, DDS, ND, Professor, National College of Natural Medicine, Portland, OR:
“I have been opposed to the use of systemic fluoride for over 25 years after observing its effects on people and animals living on an Indian reservation in the St. Lawrence River near Northern NY. The damaging health effects of systemic fluoride cannot be tolerated any longer in the US.”

Eli Ussher, BAS Conservation Technology, sewage treatment plant operator, NSW, Australia:
““I am totally against fluoridation of water supplies because it goes against the civil liberties of democracy and because honest scientific analysis proves it is a major health concern when added to water supplies. Any small benefit of fluoride is associated with topical application only and this can be achieved with toothpaste.”

Peter L.D. Van Caulart, Dip. A.Ed. CES, CEI*, VP & Director, Environmental Training Institute, Fonthill, Ontario, Canada:
“Since 1980, I’ve taught water/wastewater courses to treatment facility operators. Eight years for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) and the remainder with the Environmental Training Institute (ETI), which I founded in 1987. In that time I have trained more than 20,000 water/wastewater operators throughout Canada. One aspect of drinking water treatment training has included the topic of water fluoridation as a unit treatment (additive) process. Teaching emphasis was placed on delivery equipment, dosage/residual measurement and fluoride handling safety.
My first negative impression of fluoride was made in 1984 when reviewing phytotoxicology samples of injured plant species to airborne emissions. The plants were used as bio-indicators to measure downwind impacts of fluoride generating industries. I’ve lectured that fluoride compounds pose huge health risks for water treatment operators who handle the concentrated bulk forms of the chemicals. Where fluoridation exists operator fluoride exposures are casually monitored. I have visited many treatment facilities and fluoride handling systems often have fugitive emissions of fluoride dusts or vapours. This is evidenced by the accelerated corrosion of metal fixtures and frosted, etched glass on the inside of fluoride room windows. My primary objection to fluoridation has been with chronic exposures of workers.
Anecdotally, operators have recounted to me that operators who were poisoned due to on the job fluoride overexposures had to retire due to continued poor health and often died within a few years of retiring. Some operators develop fluoride sensitivities which prohibit them from fluoride handing duties for their remaining careers. Many operators would like fluoridation processes removed from the treatment train. Few seem to like working with fluoride feedstocks. For these reasons, I’ve quietly urged waterworks operators and managers to reconsider the validity of the whole fluoridation process.
For years, I had not given the original reasoning behind water fluoridation much thought, mainly due to inconclusive or contradictory data. Two years ago one of my students who had been a local councilor for the Town of Cobalt, Ontario, brought to my attention that he had successfully stopped the Town from continuing it’s fluoridation practice. He identified new evidence to me and challenged me to learn more. In doing so, I had stronger reasons for disliking the fluoridation process. Learning about fluoride’s politics as documented by Christopher Bryson in the ” The Fluoride Deception” was the last straw.
Drinking water fluoridation remains an insidious scheme to dispose of toxic industrial wastes. The practice (water fluoridation) has been spun, and marketed to an unwary public and then codified by unwitting lawmakers for mandatory dosage into a trusted commodity (water). I choose to no longer perpetuate this travesty.”

Liz Vaughan, Councilor, Information Officer for UK Councils Against Fluoridation, Cumbria,England:
“I founded North West Councils Against Fluoridation in 1989 resulting in North West Water refusing to fluoridate the North West of England in 1992. Councilors have since voted to change the name to UK Councils Against Fluoridation. In Northern Ireland 25 out of 26 councils have rejected fluoridation.”

Robert Verkerk, DIC, PhD, Executive & Scientific Director, Alliance for Natural Health, Dorking, Surrey, England:
“The World Health Organization’s guideline level for fluoride of 1.5 mg/L categorically exceeds the level that has been shown, by a significant and growing body of scientific evidence, to cause harm, or a risk of harm, in humans. For any other environmental contaminant, a significant safety margin between the Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Level and the guideline level is set using internationally recognized principles of risk assessment and management. Why have these methods, extensively used by the WHO in other areas, been ignored in the case of fluoride? Additionally, the WHO and other health authorities need to recognize the different toxicological and pharmaco-kinetic profiles of natural versus synthetic fluorides. Finally, why is it that water-treatment fluorides are not licensed as medicinal products when they are added to drinking water for the specific purpose of disease (dental caries) treatment, and such intention for disease treatment or prevention is the basis of all legal definitions of what constitutes a medicinal product?”

Robin N. Watkins, DO, MSCC, UK trained Osteopathic Practitioner, member of the General Osteopathic Council and British Osteopathic Association, Newcastle upon Tyne, England:
“I was shocked to find out that around 50% of the Newcastle population (population = 365,000) have degrees of Chronic Fluoride Toxicosis (i.e. dental fluorosis). I also have a letter from a former Primary Trust Chief Executive which states that it is not my right to receive fluoride-free water. I could not believe that a professional in such a position could make such a crass statement.”

Maria Westerman, Medical Laboratory for diagnostic tests and research, Hadassah Hospital, Ein Kerem, Jerusalem, Israel:
“A dentist in Jerusalem known to me personally finds one to two cases of children with fluorosis of the teeth per week, stating it is a systemic effect and means that fluoride is accumulating in their bones. Not all dentists are aware of this condition and frequently mis-diagnose it. Time to cease water fluoridation! (Unknown to many is that the toxic waste of the Negev fertilizer industry is used to fluoridate our drinking water, which includes traces of arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead and radioactive particles that are known carcinogens.”

Bill Wilson, Past President New Zealand Pure Water Association, Auckland, New Zealand:
“I am sure my old friend, the late John Colquhoun, BDS, M Phil, Dip Ed(Syd), M. Phil(Auck), PhD of Auckland, New Zealand would have loved to have joined this august company. He is probably remembered by many dentists in New Zealand as a profluoride advocate. However, in 1981, after a world study tour, he discovered the error of his ways and spent the remainder of his life strongly opposing fluoridation.”

Councilor Arnold Woolley, DipIM, MCMI, Rtd. Senior Police Officer, past JP and current environmental activist, North Wales, UK:
“I have spent most of my life evaluating evidence, including 22 years as a public prosecutor in various courts. In my opinion, the case against fluoridation of water supplies is evidentially sound.”

Matthew Young DDS, PA, member and director of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Hendersonville, NC:
“I have been studying all the relevant science in relation to fluoride and can only come to one conclusion. It was added to our water for the sole purpose of avoiding government law suits as a result of accidental human exposure from industrial greed and government cover-up.”

Rudolf Ziegelbecker, Ing., Honored “Citizen of the City of Graz”, retired member of the Institute for Environmental Research Graz, Research Center Graz, Austria, former member of the New York Academy of Sciences, European expert witness in several governmental and parliamentary hearings on fluoridation, co-author of the book “Vorsicht Fluor” with Dr M.O. Bruker (Emu Verlag, Lahnstein, 2005, Gemany):
“Since 1969 I have analyzed numerous respected, fundamental fluoridation experiments on which the WHO and those who promoted fluoridation around the world, rely. My investigations involved studies of both natural and artificial fluoridation – including water fluoridation as well as other fluoridation methods. I have looked at these from both a mathematical-statistical and a scientific point of view. In all these cases the differences in dental caries were verifiably caused by other factors than fluoride including statistical artifacts, inappropriate selection and manipulation of the data. Not in one single case could a caries reducing effect of fluoridation be scientifically and credibly proven. The “benefits” of fluoridation measures asserted by dentists, dental organizations and public health services are the results of scientifically impermissible conclusions drawn from these experiments and studies. Part of these alleged “benefits” are even fudged.”

Mag. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. Rudolf Ziegelbecker, Graz, Austria:
“I want to emphasize the fact that nowhere in Europe, where fluoridation has been stopped, has there been an increase of dental caries observed afterwards. Also, when collecting new, random data about natural fluoride content of drinking waters and dental caries from the WHO databases in Geneva in 1987, I could not find a trace of a benefit of (natural) fluoride in drinking water.”

Loty Zilberman, MSc, Chemical Engineer, Environmental and Toxicological Consultant, Israel:
“As a former worker in a big drug company in Romania, I was a member of the Committee to approve drug listings in Pharmacopee (A guide manual for all approved drugs). Thus, I know very well the danger of receiving an overdose of dangerous substances. This is the case with water fluoridation, an issue for which I have studied the literature for many years.”

John Zimmerman, PhD, Biological Psychology and Neuroscience, Reno, NV:
“I am opposed to water fluoridation because the benefits do not outweigh the risks.”