FELLOW residents, I’m a little worried. Having waded through the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) much-touted cornerstone documentation into fluoridation, I’ve gone on to research a highly critical review of that reporting prepared by Merilyn Haines of Fluoride Action Network (FAN) Australia. Her review, written in August last year, has identified over 20 major issues that bear greater scrutiny if this 2017 reporting by the NHMRC is be taken seriously by decision-makers. FAN is publicly calling for a Royal Commission into the NHMRC as a result. Don’t shoot the messenger.

If these NHMRC products are what state health, the Oberon Health Council and other parties are relying on to push the fluoridation agenda, then I feel there is good reason to worry.  Ignoring established and new scientific data because it fails to pass obviously restrictive entry criteria only fuels the counter-narrative and adds to suspicion; particularly when it is irrefutable data that does not support the official agenda. There’s something definitely not right about this whole affair and decision-makers should carefully consider their next move. The legal repercussions alone should cause concern. If you can chew through it, Mr Mills, and find me a reason not to worry, I’ll buy the first two rounds.