|
With the the amount of knowledge and understanding of the possibility of harm now available, plus the actual health risks and other ramifications of Artificial Drinking Water Fluoridation, here are numerous, short, sample letters composed so that you can effectively send one to your Councillor whenever your up to it. More will be added as time permits. Much new material will be obtained from the book "The Case Against Fluoride" by Connett, Beck and Micklem, to help increase this selection.Here are sample letters from which you can choose to use to send to the Councillor in your ward. Your City of Ottawa Councillor can be located using this internet address: http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/mayor_council/councillors/index_en.html. Just click on it.
You may modify any of the following sample letters to suit yourself or send them as is. Just copy and paste the contents into your email or letter, modify it to your heart's desire and send it off.
Please start each letter by formally addressing it to your Councillor in the following manner:
|
Date (as in day of the week, month day, year)
I hope that you are in good health. (Insert the letter of your choice here) (and please close your letter with the following 3 statements or something similar in your own words; it's important that we ask for action) Every statement made in this email letter can be substantiated (verified, proven) by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources.
Alternate paragraph #1,
Alternate paragraph #2,
Would you be kind enough to obtain from the Medical Officer of Health objective, verifiable, unbiased and valid research on the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid that shows that this substance is safe and effective for tooth decay prevention as claimed by those who say that it is and provide me with the result of your request. Thank you. Sincerely, (or Respectfully)
First Name Last Name |
Please end each letter you send with the above closing format. It is very important that you include your Postal code and phone number to assure your Councillor that you live in his or her ward and that they may contact you at their leisure. However, it is our experience that they will not contact you because of the peculiar nature of our efforts to bring an end to fluoridation in Ottawa.
If you have any idea for improvement of the closing of the letter, please let me know. The better they are written, the more impact it will have on our Councillors.
Please also copy and paste your letter onto letter paper, print it and send it by regular mail to your City Councillor at the postal address. This wil reinforce the vakue of your request and will give greater impact.
Also, please send me a copy of each letter you send to your Councillor from your Sent folder by using the forward feature so we have documentation that they have been informed of our concerns about adding this terrible acid to our water supply.
This is very important. It will be useful later when we meet with Councillors and the whole Council. The more of these we have, the more we can ask them if they really care about the health and well being of those who vote for them and all others in their ward and in our City.
A final note of information: as a result of mentioning numerous times that there was an error in the spelling of the acid's name on the City's web page, it has finally been corrected. It had been misspelled as hydrofluorosilic acid instead of hydrofluorosilicic acid. So, somebody has been reading my emails (March 21, 2011).
|
FIRST SAMPLE LETTER
Date
In light of the fact that:
BACKGROUND
With more cities moving to do the same very soon, and a growing number of U.S. cities, is it not incumbent upon you to help bring our City in line with the current trend and the current evidence on the adverse health effects of ADWF? Promoters of ADWF will warn of dire consequences for tooth decay resulting from ending ADWF that are completely without foundation while parroting the tired old canard that it is safe and effective. The very contrary is self evident when all the currently known research and science on the subject are examined. You should resist the urge to bend to the medical bureaucrats who, while accusing their opponents of ignorance of the facts and the science, know very little about these same facts and science. Their silence is deafening when asked for tangible and valid proof of their claims. It is past midnight in this ill fated debate over a practice that started out as the fraudulent marketing of a toxic waste product of the phosphate fertilizer and aluminum industries for profit while taunting it as a false remedy for tooth decay. Shouldn't you now resolve to take up the torch that is offered to you to bring about the cessation of ADWF for Ottawa by current circumstances all over western countries. Our group is prepared to supply you with enough tangible proof of the above statements and of other matters related to this most deplorable use of a highly hazardous, toxic waste substance to insure your full understanding of the enormity of the errror in continuing with ADWF. I am looking for your personal response to the points raised in this letter. A prepared statement by the MOH would be most disingenuous on your part, so please do not respond with either the MOH or DOH standard statement. I am all too familiar with these statements that are full of misrepresentations of facts and misleading, unproven and recently debunked statements, not the least of which is the false claim that the WHO endorses water fluoridation. Every statement made in this letter can be substantiated by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources. Will you please commit to bringing an end to injection of hydrofluorosilicic acid used for the fluoridation of our municipal water supply, by putting forward a motion for either a moratorium on this wasteful and unlawful practice until hard, verifiable and valid data are available about its benefits, or voting it out of existence because such valid data does not exist? Our growing group of activists will provide you with all the support you need to accomplish whichever choice you make. How about at least letting me know if you are in favor of or just plain still undecided on ending ADWF?
Sincerely
(your name and address below) Sample letter #1
The costs of purchasing hydrofluorosilicic acid for the fluoridation of our drinking water, the capital cost of equipment and the overhead costs are not justifiable when the best that can shown for artificial drinking water fluoridation is that it can only save one sixth of one tooth surface out of 128 tooth surfaces in a child's mouths. Coupled with the fact that less than 1% of our treated water is actually used for actual drinking and thus only that small percentage gets to the teeth for its yet to be proven purported benefit, this further magnifies the futility of using this acid as a fluoridation agent. Think about this for a moment: the other 99% is flushed down toilets and into drains from sinks, dishwashers, clothes washers, showers, bathtubs and for various house cleanings, as well as for washing cars, driveways, windows and exterior house walls in addition to firefighting and many commercial and industrial uses. That means that it ends up in the environment where it has been banned from being ejected by the EPA because it is classified as a toxic waste product. How is it possible that when this highly toxic acid waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry is put into a truck and sold to our water utilities to fluoridate our tap water, it is magically transformed into a drug beneficial to children's teeth? (add closing statements)Sample letter #2
The increasing incidence of irreversible dental fluorosis caused by the ingestion of hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) used as a fluoridation agent in our City's drinking water can cost up to $20,000 per person depending on severity. This does not justify the alleged meagre benefits yet to be validly verified with hard evidence. Then there are the ethical issues of forcibly mass medicating a whole population without their consent using this unregulated, untested, uncontrolled, untreated and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry as a drug to attempt to stop tooth decay when current evidence does not support this obsolete practice. The following toxic impurities are also part of the solution this acid comes in: fluorine, lead, phosphorus, HF (hydrogen fluoride), arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, iron, iodine, mercury, selenium, silver, uranium 238, radon and other radionuclides. Still want to drink that next glass of water now? In addition to the above, the many other known health risks attributable to the addition of this toxic acid to our City's drinking water for fluoridation that promoters of this practice refuse to recognize in spite of mounting evidence. This should tell you that it is time for us to turn off the tap on it and stop wasting our tax dollars on a tragic, doubtful and unlawful health measure. (add closing statements)Sample letter #3
Do you know that hydrofluorosilicic acid is the name of the substance used by our City to fluoridate our drinking water? Do you know that its chemical formula is H2SiF6 but also contains a number of noxious impurities? Do you know where that acid comes from? This may come as a surprise to you, but it comes from the wet scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry producing this highly hazardous, toxic waste product and that it is not a pharmaceutical grade substitute for a fluoridating agent. Do you know what other noxious substances this acid contains when it is received at our water treatment plant to be injected into our drinking water? The specifications, of which we have a copy, from the supplier clearly state that this acid contains the following other toxic elements in solution: fluorine, lead, phosphorus, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, iron, iodine, lead, mercury, selenium, silver, plus hydrogen fluoride (HF). See the specification sheet here. This is what you swallow with every glass of water you drink. Do you still want to drink this tap water now? (add closing statements)Sample letter #4
Do you know that adding hydrofluorosilicic acid to our drinking water for artificial drinking water fluoridation is an unlawful practice according to the known facts about this practice? Fact number one: The claimed purpose of adding hydrofluorosilicic acid to our water is to prevent or reduce cavities. Fact number two: The above claim defines the use of that acid as a drug, or medication according to the Health Canada Food and Drug Act. Fact number three: Such health products must be prepared and stored in hygienic conditions and have toxicological tests performed on them to determine any adverse health effects. Fact number four: Hydrofluorosilicic acid is an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry unapproved and unregulated for use as a drug. Since it is injected into our water supply to allegedly prevent or reduce tooth decay, therefore, it treats an illness or disease and not the water. Any statement to the contrary by any authority, no matter their status or prestige is misleading and is a misrepresentation of facts. (add closing statements)Sample letter #5
Do you know that you are now personally liable for damages for the health effects known to exist due to the practice of adding hydrofluorosilicic acid for artificial drinking water fluoridation? Many insurance companies that pay out litigation costs to municipalities for legal proceedings resulting from the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid in water fluoridation have been reviewing their policies and have put in place clauses that will disallow such payments in the future. Is this the case with our City's insurance policy? If so, would the City senselessly use our tax dollars to pay for such litigation? Are you aware of any litigation being prepared against the City and all those concerned with the administration and decision making for adding hydrofluorosilicic acid for artificial drinking water fluoridation? (add closing statements)Sample letter #6
Adding any substance to drinking water for the purpose of treating a disease or illness automatically defines it as a drug, according the Health Canada Food and Drug Act. There are also no fluoride substances approved by Health Canada as additives for use in water, in spite of their promotion of this practice. In Ottawa, hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) is the substance injected into our water claiming to stop tooth or reduce tooth decay. Therefore this substance is automatically defined as a drug, and nothing else. It is also not compliant with the Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act. Unlike chlorine, which treats the water for pathogens in the water, fluorine does not. This acid is an an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry unlawfully used as a fluoridating agent in our tap water that also contains fluorine, lead, phosphorus, HF (hydrogen fluoride), arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, iron, iodine, mercury, selenium, silver, radon, uranium 238 and traces of other radionuclides. Do you still want to drink our tap water now? (add closing statements)Sample letter #7
In Ottawa, hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) is the substance injected into our water claiming to stop tooth or reduce tooth decay. Therefore this substance is automatically defined as a drug, and nothing else. It is also not compliant with the Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act. Unlike chlorine, which treats the water for pathogens in the water, fluorine does not. Have you ever heard of a doctor prescribing any medication and telling the patient that he or she could take as much as they wanted any time, any day, for the rest of their life? However, that is exactly what adding this acid to our water supply effectively does. There are people who will drink in excess of 6 liters, even as much as 10 liters or more per day, such as Athletes, labourers, some diabetics, patients on dialysis, lactating mothers, police, firefighters, military personnel to name a few. This means that they are easily exceeding the recommended safe maximum level of ingestion of this fluoridating substance. Should you not be concerned about this? (add closing statements)Sample letter #8
Do you know that hydrofluorosilicic acid is a highly hazardous, toxic waste product of the phosphate fertilizer industry and that it is being injected into our drinking water supply as a fluoridation product to allegedly stop or reduce tooth decay? Aside from the fact that hydrofluorosilicic acid is an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled, unpurified and unregulated toxic waste product, it is being forced on everybody without their informed consent, something no doctor is allowed to do. On the point of forced medication, if any doctor was would force medicate a patient would loose their licence to practice medicine. For any organization, including a City Council, or any group of voters to decide to force medicate all of the residents of our City is illogical, unethical and bad medical practice. None of these groups has a licence to practice medicine and are therefore not qualified to practice medicine, much less prescribe any medication to all residents of any City. (add closing statements)Sample letter #9
Here are some of the best known verifiable health effects and illnesses aggravated by adding hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) to our drinking water as a fluoridation substance.
There are also clearer and clearer indications that since the misguided beginning of the addition of hydrofluorosilicic acid or other fluorosilicates to drinking water in North America, there has been a concurrent increase in degenerative diseases in the whole North American population. Do you want the responsibility of not having stopped this invalid practice while you can? (add closing statements)Sample letter #10
Chlorine is used to treat water to make it more drinkable, whereas adding hydrofluorosilicic acid is added to our drinking water to treat people, especially children whose growing teeth will be severely impacted by ingestion of this acid. Anyone who tells you anything different about these two processes either does not know the facts about water treatment or is ignoring the reality to perpetrate a hidden agenda. Use of chlorine may not be the best way to kill the bacteria in out drinking water to make it safe to drink, but it is not the worst either. However, hydrofluorosilicic acid does nothing of the sort. It is strictly claimed to stop or reduce tooth decay. Recent scientific studies have completely refuted this claim. In fact, scientific research has shown that although the fluorine element in hydrofluorosilicic acid that does get into the enamel appears to strengthen it, it has also been categorically shown to renders the enamel more brittle and subject to easier breakage, as well as leading to dental fluorosis in over 40% of young people in the range of 12 to 15 years of age. (add closing statements)Sample letter #11
Are you aware that hydrofluorosilicic acid used to fluoridate our City's drinking water is not suitable for preventing dental cavities by ingestion? Dr. Arvid Carlsson, PhD and a Nobel Prize winner in medicine has categorically stated in 2002 that "Fluoridation of water supplies would also treat people who may not benefit from the treatment. Side-effects cannot be excluded and, thus, some people might only have negative effects without any benefit." "In Sweden, water fluoridation … is no longer advocated by anybody. In Sweden, the emphasis nowadays is to keep the environment as clean as possible with regard to pharmacologically active and, thus, potentially toxic substances." (add closing statements)Sample letter #12
Are you aware that if there is any favourable effect from the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid to prevent or reduce tooth decay that it has been accepted by scientists and reliable health authorities as being effective only when applied to the surface of the teeth? Therefore swallowing this acid with your drinking water to prevent cavities is the same thing as swallowing suntan lotion with your drinking water to prevent sunburn. Both are patently ridiculous ideas in light of the evidence. Neither of these are reasonable medical treatments. (add closing statements)Sample letter #13
Here is the definition of a toxic substance in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Toxic substances are defined as any one of the following:
This definition is from the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA): Toxic Substances List Updated Schedule 1, as of December 27, 2006 Here are some of these substances that fall under that definition: Lead, Mercury, Inorganic Arsenic, Radioactive Substances, Inorganic Fluorides such as Hydrofluorosilicic Acid, other Fluorosilicates and all artificially fluorinated products, whether food, beverage, commercial or industrial products. (add closing statements)Sample letter #14
Do you know that hydrofluorosilicic acid is the substance used by our City as a fluoridating agent and that it is a highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry. By adding this acid to the water, the City is effectively drugging everybody without a medical licence and does so against all basic pharmacological principles. Drugs should not be put into drinking water because:
b) There is no choice to refuse or accept this drug since it is in the water and we all need water to survive, c) There is no trained professional to assess medical need and adverse effects, d) There is no medical follow-up for any health effects of chronic ingestion of this drug. Sample letter #15
Do you know that no authority accepts responsibility for the addition of hydrofluorosilicic acid to our water supply for the purpose of fluoridation. Yet they all promote it as a "safe and effective" means of eliminating or reducing tooth decay in spite of the fact that they advance no actual facts or credible data to support their vaunted claims. It is not logical to accept the advice of those who accept no responsibility for these products:
Ontario Ministry of Health, Ontario Ministry of Environment, Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion, Canadian Dental Association, Ontario Dental Association, Canadian Medical association. Ontario Medical association. It is not sensible to trust anyone or any organization that will not take responsilility for their promoting anything. Car dealers stand behind their promotions. Why won't these organizations do the same for their health realted statements? However, as it turns out, because the City is the one that executes the implementation of this obsolete and injurious measure purported to reduce or end tooth decay, everyone having anything to do with its implementation and execution is liable for the consequences of its application. Will you take responsibility for this measure and end it before any harm is done to this City's residents? As my elected representative, you have no choice in accepting or refusing responsibility. It is your duty and responsibility to inform yourself of the validity of claims and endorsements made by promoters of fluoridation and to act in the best interest of the residents of your ward and, by extension, of all residents of our City. (add closing statements)Sample letter #16
The substance used in the fluoridation of our City's water supply, hydrofluorosilicic acid, H2SiF6), is a highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry that contains numerous other toxins in it's supplied solution. This is the first time in the history of mankind that anyone or any prestigious organization has ever claimed that a highly hazardous waste has health benefits:
Sample letter #17
Use of hydrofluorosilicic acid as a fluoridation agent in our City's drinking water supply is a measure that is entirely unethical. This measure does to the whole population of our City what even one doctor can not do to a single patient. It force medicates everyone by approval from vote. Yet, those voting have no medical authority to do so. If a doctor was to force medicate any one of his patients he would soon loose his licence to practice medicine. This does not even say anything about the fact that hydrofluorosilicic acid is an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry used as a drug to attempt to stop tooth decay when current evidence does not support this obsolete practice. (add closing statements)Sample letter #18
There are currently only 3 methods for removing the hydrofluorosilicic acid used as for the fluoridation of our City's drinking water.
I consider it imperative that we remove from our drinking water this unregulated, untested, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry used as a drug to attempt to stop tooth decay when current evidence does not support this obsolete practice. (add closing statements)Sample letter #19
As a resident of Ottawa, I object most strenuously to the addition of the unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product that comes to us from the phosphate fertilizer industry. This substance is called hydrofluorosilicic acid and it is used as a fluoridating agent in my tap water. It also contains other toxic waste products in it because it is not treated for their removal before being injected in our tap water. I do not wish to ingest this toxin so I have to resort to purchasing a water purification system at great cost to remove the fluoride from my tap water. Why should I have to pay taxes for water treatment that I do not want to drink because it contains undesirable chemical toxins in it and then have to spend more money to remove the toxic waste product that does not belong in that water in the first place. (add closing statements)Sample letter #20
Promoters of the use of artificial tap water fluoridation are claiming that it is the same as chlorinating our water supply. However, they are effectively promoting the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid which is used as the fluoridating agent. They are misleading you since only chlorination of water is meant to treat the water to kill bacteria. Fluoridation is not. Our City is knowingly adding a hazardous, toxic acid as a fluoride to target a disease in people. It's stated purpose is to eliminate or prevent tooth decay. That makes it a drug, by definition. It does not make the water more drinkable. Anything used to treat a disease or illness in people or animals is a drug, or medication, by definition. Chlorine does not heal or treat any disease. It kills pathogens present in the water making it safer to drink. Fluoridation is NOT used to make the water safe. In fact, it adds an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry that we should not be swallowing with our water. It simply uses the public water supply to deliver an unsafe medication. Such a practice is totally unwarranted. Once medicine is added to tap water, key controls are lost. With medicine in the water, you cannot control the dose that people take, and you cannot control who gets the medicine. People with teeth get it as do people who have lost all of their teeth. What good then is fluoridation to the toothless? There are other dangers lurking behind this practice but that is a topic for another day. Some people like athletes, firemen, military personnel in the field, lactating mothers, some diabetics, labourers and many others may drink in excess of ten liters per day. At a controlled concentration of 0.7 mg per liter, the same as 0.7 parts per million, all of these people are over dosing on fluoride at dangerous levels because they are swallowing over 7 mg of the toxic fluoride substance per day. Moreover, the City is forcing medication on people without their informed consent and, especially in the case of low-income families, without their ability to avoid the medicine if they wish. (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #1, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #21
Promoters of artificial tap water fluoridation claim that they are just topping up the natural fluoride already in the water. That claim has got to be one of the most preposterous and obtuse one ever made by any health officials. Natural does not necessarily mean good. Arsenic, like fluoride, leaches naturally from rocks into groundwater, but no one suggests topping that up. Besides, there is nothing "natural" about the fluoridating chemicals currently used in modern fluoridation practice. The chemical used in Ottawa is hydrofluorosilicic acid is an unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product obtained from the wet scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. It's a silicon fluoride does not occur in nature. What is more, under international law they cannot be dumped into any lake, stream, river, the sea, the air or into the ground, yet a dilution of about 180,000 to 1 is supposed to protect against all harm to your teeth when added to tap water. In an effort to persuade citizens that the chemicals used in fluoridation are not hazardous waste products of the fertilizer industry, health officials use misrepresentations of facts and language worded to confuse the understanding of this enormously erroneous practice. (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #2, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #22
Promoters of artificial tap water fluoridation claim that fluoride is a nutrient and good for your health. This has got to be the most outrageous claim ever made by any health official bar none. They, of all people, should know better. Fluorides are composed one or more fluorine atom joined to any other gas, mineral, liquid or any form of organic material. Fluorine is an elemental substance that is the single most chemically reactive on earth. Because of that property, it is a scavenger and can not be found in its natural form on earth. It can only be isolated by itself with great difficulty and at great cost. Many early researchers died “at the hands” of this voracious chemical element. In order to establish that a substance is an essential nutrient, a researcher has to remove the substance from the diet and demonstrate that disease results. This has not been shown to occur with a lack of fluoride, nor is fluoride known to contribute to any normal metabolic process. The only thing that fluoride contributes to any metabolic processes in your body and mine is disease, destruction and even the death of these processes. It has been unequivocally shown to destroy numerous enzymes necessary for our health. So why are we swallowing this poison with our tap water? Are you still drinking tap water but not warning others of the injurious consequences of ingesting this horrible chemical? (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #3, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #23
Promoters of artificial tap water fluoridation claim that it's no different than adding iron, folic acid, or vitamin D to bread and other foodstuffs. However, there is a world of difference:
Additionally, it contains other toxic substances that are added to tap water, such as fluorine, lead, phosphorus, HF (hydrogen Fluoride), Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Iron, Iodine, Mercury, Selenium, Silver and radioactive substances such as polonium, uranium 238 and radon. Do you still want to drink that tap water? (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #4, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #24
Promoters of artificial tap water fluoridation claim that the amount of fluoride substance added to the public water system, 1 part per million, is so small it couldn't possibly hurt you. They use analogies such as 1 part per million is equivalent to one cent in $10,000 or one inch in sixteen miles to make it appear that we are dealing with insignificant quantities of fluoride. Such analogies are nonsensical without reference to the toxicity of the chemical in question. For example, 1 part per million is about a million times higher than the safe concentration of dioxin anyone can swallow, and over 250 times higher than the safe drinking water standard for arsenic and 400 times higher than the amount of lead allowed in tap water; it is also up to 250 times higher than the level of fluoride found in most mother's milk. Nature protects our babies by insuring that as much fluoride substance as possible is filtered out by a mother's breast. Consider this: the amount of toxin in a scorpion's bite is very tiny as is that of the most deadly spiders or the smallest deadly snakes in the world. Yet all will kill you rather quickly even under the best of circumstances. Fluoride substances in the water may not kill you right away, but their impact is cumulative. Long term ingestion will harm you in the long term. The amount of fluoride substance in a glass of water is equivalent to about the same amount of fluoride substance in one pea sized amount of toothpaste. In the U.S. every tube of fluorinated toothpaste has a warning on it that says "if swallowed, call the poison control centre." (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #5, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #25
Promoters of artificial tap water fluoridation claim that everything is toxic given a high enough dose, even water. For once they get it right, but one has to be careful when using the word high. Fluoride substances are extremely toxic, especially for young children, as the following quote from Dr. Gary Whitford, a leading fluoride researcher at the Medical College of Georgia, illustrates: “It may be concluded that if a child ingests a fluoride dose in excess of 15 mg F/kg (mg of fluoride per kg of weight), then death is likely to occur. A dose as low as 5 mg F/kg may be fatal for some children.” “Therefore, the probable toxic dose defined as the threshold dose that could cause serious or life-threatening systemic signs and symptoms and that should trigger immediate emergency treatment and hospitalization is 5 mg F/kg.” Thus, according to Whitford, a 7 kg infant could be killed by a dose of just 35 milligrams of fluoride. To get such a dose would require swallowing 50 liters of water at 0.7 ppm - (0.7 parts per million (ppm) = 0.7 mg per liter). No infant could possibly drink 50 liters of water in one sitting, so we are not talking about killing babies with fluoridated water. But there is a world of difference between a chronic toxic dose and a lethal dose. What we are particularly concerned about is the impact of consuming water at 0.7 ppm over an extended period of time. In the case of infants, a huge concern is the possible impact on their mental development over the first few years of life, since studies have shown that levels as low as 1.9 ppm fluoride in water are associated with a lowering of IQ in China. So, at 0.7 ppm, it will only take 2.71 times longer to get the same results. Have you ever wondered why there are fewer and fewer students with advanced intelligence, not enough to justify special needs classes for them? In the case of adults, we are concerned about lifelong exposure to levels of 6 mg per day or even lower and what damage that might do to bones, ligaments and to the alarming increase of Alzheimer and Dementia in the elderly concurrent with the growth of the implementation of fluoridation starting over 60 years ago. (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #6, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #26
German and Austrian scientists knew in the early 1930's that hyperthyroidism (an overactive thyroid) could be successfully treated by bathing patients in water containing a small amounts of fluoride. That discovery was made almost a century ago. Fluoride could block thyroid function. For any government to force this same treatment on a nation of people with healthy thyroids under the lie that fluoride “prevents cavities in children,” is unconscionable. The Nuremberg Code of ethics pertaining to human experimentation labels it a criminal act, stating" “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.” when performing experiments on human. Today, nearly 100% of Ottawans are forced to receive this thyroid-blocking chemical from their tap water without consent or medical monitoring for overdose, allergic reaction, blocked thyroid function or long term effects. The benefits are being reaped by the largest of industries: the pharmaceutical industry. Fluoride has created a nation of suffering people seeking more drugs to treat blocked thyroids and fluoride toxicity. We might drink bottled water, but most of us cannot avoid the bathwater. (add closing statements)Sample letter #27
It is not debatable that the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid as a fluoride for water fluoridation can cause significant harm to humans as well as to other mammals. The real question is whether the fluoride concentrations added to the drinking water consumed by the majority of North Americans contribute to that significant harm. The answer is beyond any doubt “yes” because factors such as
b) inhaled, and c) absorbed from other sources, This makes it a statistical certainty that a significantly large number of the millions of individuals that are consuming fluoridated water will be harmed. I am looking for your personal response to the points raised in this letter, not the standard letter from the Medical officer of health. “Never doubt that a small group of people can change the world....indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” — Margaret Mead Continuing to wait for a reply to my request, I remain, Respectfully yours, (add signature block)Sample letter #28
In light of the fact that:
BACKGROUND Promoters of ADWF will warn of dire consequences for tooth decay resulting from ending ADWF that are unfounded while parroting the tired old canard that it is safe and effective to practice ADWF. The very contrary is self evident when all the currently known data and scoience on the subject are weighed in. You should resist the urge to bend to so-called authorities who, while accusing their opponents of ignorance of the facts and the science, themselves know very little about these same facts and science. Their silence is deafening when asked for tangible and valid proof of their claims. It is past midnight in this ill fated debate over a practice that started out as the fraudulent marketing of a toxic waste product of the phosphate fertilizer and aluminum industries as a remedy for tooth decay and you really should resolve to take up the torch that is offered to you for Ottawa by current circumstances in the termination of ADWF all over western countries. I am prepared to supply you with enough tangible proof of the above statements and of other matters related to this most deplorable use of a toxic waste substance to insure your full understanding of the enormity of the errror in continuing with ADWF. I am looking for your personal response to the points raised in this letter. A prepared statement by the MOH would be most disingenuous on your part. (add closing statements)Sample letter #29
I write to you as a member of a growing group of informed taxpayers in this city. We urge this city to join a growing number of municipalities who are voting to end fluoridation of our city's water supply. After thorough investigation of peer reviewed medical research we have come to the consensus that water fluoridation is unethical, unnecessary, and has little if any preventative benefits. Water fluoridation for the City of Ottawa costs us, the taxpayers, over $400,000 a year and we feel the money could be better spent. Water fluoridation is also a form of mass, involuntary medication, as it infringes on freedom of choice as to whether or not we want to be drugged by it. Consider that 98% of European countries do not fluoridate their water supply and have equal or better cavity rates to that of North Americans. Verchères, Calgary and Waterloo have recently adopted this fluoridation cessation. It is our hope that Ottawa will do the same in the near future. (add closing statements) (Based on FLUORIDE FREE MONCTON form letter, 2011.04.18, http://fluoridefreemoncton.ca/whatcanido.html)Sample letter #30
Companies that would normally have to pay to safely dispose of industrial toxic waste are in fact turning a profit by selling it to municipalities across North America and dumping it into their water supply as a “fluoride.” So it's in the tap water that we drink. Our bodies have become toxic waste dump sites. Unlike chlorine or anything else added to the water, hydrofluosilicic acid is the only thing that is put in it not to treat the water but to treat people's teeth. Unlike chlorine, the only way to filter it out is with a very spercialized reverse osmosis or a distillation system costing thousands of dollars. You can read several professional and peer-reviewed medical studies linking fluoride to dental and skeletal fluorosis, bone cancer, kidney problems, negative effects on the pineal gland, thyroid and reproductive systems as well as studies on the relationship between fluoride and lowering IQ at the following web link: 50 reasons to oppose water fluoridation at http://ffo-olf.org/50Reasons.html. (add closing statements)Sample letter #31
Proclamations, pronouncements, statements, declarations and endorsements in support of Artificial Drinking Water Fluoridation are not science. That's what's used to sell fluoridation along with faulty and fraudulent data from over 60 years ago. These are given by individuals in charge of government or prestigious organizations with very little or no knowledge of the science behind the effects of substances that contain elemental fluorine in them on the human anatomy. The evidence of harm is immense, as attested to by the 2006 National Research Council (U.S.) report. This report identifies fluoride as an “endocrine disruptor”, and its overdose effects on teeth are described as “adverse.” The conclusion is that current limits in drinking water don't protect the health of anyone despite off handed comments to the contrary. Harm to the thyroid and a baby's brain begins at the intake level of 0.01 mg/kg/day with associated iodine deficiency. Yet the fluoride intake that Health Canada recommends as fine for all infants (whose formula is likely mixed with fluoridated tap water) is 12 times higher! Health Canada offers no credible scientific evidence to support this recommendation. The evidence of benefit is non-existent. Do your own research. You'll discover the real truth about the lies and deceit that went into selling fluoridation to North America. Do you not know what is used as a fluoridating agent and where it comes from. You'll be as surprised as I was and will probably change your mind about the fraudulent claim that it works as intended. It is the absolute top worst public-health achievement of the 20th century. There, I've said it. (add closing statements)Sample letter #32
Michael Connett Fluoride Action Network (FAN) USA reports: 2007 was yet another important year in fluoride research, with studies not only questioning long-held views about fluoride's benefits, but raising new concerns (http://www.fluoridealert.org/sc.am.jan.2008.html) about its impact on human health (http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/index.html). To avoid the knowledge found on these web pages is tantamount to ignoring that mosquitoes bites in malaria infested counttries will give you malaria if you are not vaccinated against the disease. You really should watch this short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbOPSm5S3D0 (add closing statements)Sample letter #33
Regardless of whether or not hydrofluosilicic acid prevents cavities, hydrofluosilicic acid is a poison. Adding hydrofluosilicic acid to the water supply and thus poisoning it with the intention of preventing cavities is forced medication and it violates a person's liberty in avoiding such a practice. It violates a person's right to decide whether or not he or she shall come into contact with this poison. No one in government has the right to poison anyone. Period. Given the overabundance of evidence that proves hydrofluosilicic acid is a known poison and a major health hazard, it must be taken out of the water supply immediately. Intentionally adding this poison, no matter the amount, to the public's water supply is more than just irresponsible. It is immoral, unethical, and criminal. (add closing statements)Sample letter #34
In animal studies, the following findings were arrived at. Drs. Van Reensburg and De Vos pointed out: “It is significant that evidence of interference with reproduction was shown long before there were any symptoms of ill health, inappetence [loss of appetite] or mottling of the teeth ... not one of the animals showed signs of poor health or loss of appetite up to the end of the fourth breeding season, though erosion, pitting and mottling of the teeth became increasingly evident.” More recent laboratory studies have shown that 1 part per million fluoride leads to depressed testosterone synthesis. Additional studies have shown that this leads to a depression of spermatozoid function in males and a loss of fertility in females. The October 12,1984 issue of the Wall Street Journal in a front page story pointed out: “In recent years, infertility specialists have seen a marked increase in the number of couples unable to conceive .... At the same time physicians note, the average sperm count among men is decreasing. Toxic environmental pollution is thought to be a culprit.” There appears to be little evidence that the addition of fluoride to the water supplies in recent years has been able to improve fertility rates. In fact, there i snow plenty of evidence dating back to 1983 that fluoride lowers fertility rates in both men and women. (add closing statements)Sample letter #35
Mottled and brittle teeth is a condition known as dental fluorosis. The condition weakens teeth, making them porous and thus easily stained. The mottled spots start off white but typically turn brown. It's permanent and recurring, and treating it is very costly. If this description sounds familiar, there's a good reason. Dr. Hardy Limeback (BSc, DDS, Ph.D, Associate Professor of Dentistry and Head of The Preventative Dentistry Program at the University of Toronto) says "most" of the children he treats in his Mississauga practise suffer dental fluorosis, and by some estimates, 60 per cent of all children living in fluoridated areas have it. What causes dental fluorosis in these children is not just the water. Young children do not have the reflexes to avoid swallowing toothpaste when brushing their teeth. Plus, when fluoride substances are in the water, they get into just about everything else we drink and eat. We cook and prepare most of our foods and beverages with tap water! You may be already aware of a U.S. study documenting that 40.6% of children and teenagers aged 12-15 and 33.4% of children aged 6-11 have developed dental fluorosis, a sign of an overdose of fluoride (Figure 2, Prevalence of Dental Fluorosis … Prevalence and Severity of Dental Fluorosis in the United States, 1999–2004, Dr. Eugenio D. Beltrán-Aguilar, D.M.D., M.S., Dr. P.H. Laurie Barker, M.S.P.H., and Dr. Bruce A. Dye, D.D.S., M.P.H. — NCHS Data Brief ¦ No. 53 ¦ November 2010). (add closing statements)Sample letter #36
Fluoride affects kidneys in many and perverse ways, as Carole Clinch outlines in her .pdf file. The kidney is the main organ for excretion of fluoride. However, fluoride gradually builds up in the kidneys and diminishes the kidneys' ability to excrete fluoride. At some point the slow downward drift accelerates into a fast spiral. The patient has to go on dialysis. In the end stage patients spend 4.5 hour per clinic session every other day. Clinic operators must eliminate all fluoride from dialysis machines to avoid adding fluoride to the kidney patient's blood, as this can be fatal. Dr. George Waldbott said this in a case study: "In my medical practice I have encountered two cases in which fluoridated water interfered with kidney function. One of these, Miss G.L., 27 years old, had been under my care from July 1966 to September 1969 for allergic nasal and sinus disease. She had a congenital cystic kidney necessitating consultation with a urologist. As shown by its inability to excrete indigo carmine, a dye employed as an indicator of kidney function, the left kidney was not working and was slated for removal. In 2008 the National Kidney Foundation retracted it's endorsement of fluoride in writing, although it did so in the most bashful way possible, perhaps because the NKF gets its funding from the CDC. The NKF wrote that those with chronic kidney disease should be notified of the potential risk from exposure to fluorides. However, NKF chose to send notice only by posting the news quietly on its website, hidden on a back page and with no link to it on the front page. NKF said more research should be done. No more has been heard from NKF on the subject. (add closing statements)Sample letter #37
Fluoride has been added to our water supply since November 1965, supposedly for the benefit of our teeth. It is widely believed that adding fluoride to the drinking water will help to prevent dental caries (cavities). However, the 1999 Centers For Disease Control study widely cited as justification for the fluoridation of the water supply only looked at topical applications of fluoride in the form of toothpastes and dental fluoride treatments, not ingested fluoride. The Green Party of Canada reasons for deciding to ban fluoridation in tap water as a policy issue are mainly environmental, citing the fact that the fluoride chemicals put into our drinking water are actually toxic by-products scrubbed from the smokestacks of the phosphate mining industry. It is a certainty that 99% of this fluoridated water ends up being discharged back into the environment, because none of the processes used to treat sewage water can remove fluoride. The environmental impact is extremely important, for sure, but I come at the issue from the perspective of how fluoridation immediately affects our health. In 2006, a distinguished panel appointed by the National Research Council of the National Academies in the U.S. published a 500 page report about the effects of excessive fluoride ingestion. Their conclusion was that the standard set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of 4.0 parts per million is unsafe and causing “increased risk of bone fractures, decreased thyroid function, lowered IQ, arthritic-like conditions, dental fluorosis, osteosarcoma and other harm to human health.” (add closing statements)Sample letter #38
It is not debatable that the use of the hydrofluorosilicic acid contaminant as a fluoride for water fluoridation can cause significant harm to human beings as well as to other mammals. The real question is not whether the fluoride concentration added to the drinking water consumed by the majority of North Americans contributes to that significant harm but to what degree it does so.
b) inhaled, and c) absorbed through the skin from other sources, Every statement made in this email letter can be substantiated (verified, proven) by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources. Please do not forward a reply with the standard statement from the Medical Officer of Health in response to this letter. I'm am not interested in their well crafted statements on this subject. I am looking for a personal response on
Please help bring an end to dripping this hydrofluorosilicic acid used for the fluoridation of our municipal water supply. I believe that a motion to Council is in order for either
Thank you in advance for the attention you will give to this serious matter.
Sample letter #39
Are you aware that the Canadian municipality of Lakeshore, Ontario, has wisely opted for cessation of fluoridation on October 29, 2011, on behalf of their citizens. Over 40 municipalities across Canada have stopped deliberately contaminating their otherwise purified water since 1990 and over 200 in the U.S.A. I am hopeful that Ottawa will do the same. Please protect our residents, as well as those working in or visiting our City who will unwittingly drink our water and wash and bathe in our water contaminated with hydrofluorosilicic acid. Below is more documentation why artificial water fluoridation should be resisted and rejected wherever it is threatened and should cease wherever it exists. (add closing statements) References:1) http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=828442&GUID=B1B850E6-5BB5-4CC1-9492-6E1070A72B31&Options=&Search 2) http://sapphireeyesproductions.blogspot.com/ 3) http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/fact_sheets/engineering/wfadditives.htm 4) http://www.freewebs.com/fluoridation/newyorkcity.htm 5) Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-gv2R7O9Zk 6. Transcript: http://www.firewaterfilm.com/FW%20Tsct-%20Dr.%20Caree%20Alexander.pdf 7) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thomas-p-connelly-dds/mouth-health-fluoridated_b_641767.html 8) Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NEZY2iDoUI 9)Transcript: http://www.firewaterfilm.com/FW%20Tsct-%20Dr.%20Andrew%20Harms.pdf 10) http://www.fluoridealert.org/limeback.aspx 11) Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roI2_3q8eok 12) http://www.sw4sc.org/MWDweb.htm 13) http://www.fluoridealert.org/statement.quotes.aug.2007.pdf 14) http://www.fluoridealert.org/fan_oehha_9_6_11.pdf 15) http://www.FluorideAction.Net/communities.htm Sample letter #40
We take raw water from the river, put it through expensive chemical and filtration processes until it is drinkable. Then, once purified, we put in a dangerous, highly hazardous, toxic waste substance in it called hydrofluorosilicic acid that also contains lead, arsenic, mercury, uranium238 and other denatured elements, some of which are cancer causing (carcinogenic) and neurotoxic. Does that make sense to you? Do you not know that the maximum allowable contaminant level for lead, arsenic, mercury and uranium238 is set at zero? Doesn't zero mean zero? So, even one part per trillion is unacceptable, right? Do you want to be the one who's going to swallow some of those contaminants? They say it's ok, because it is so diluted that it can't have any effect on us, then why do they claim that the "fluoride" has any for teeth? It's diluted too! However, that aside, please consider that the fluorine atom of all fluorides is known to be both carcinogenic and neurotoxic even in very small amounts and it's cumulative. It's part of its nature. Don't count on any medical bureaucrats to tell you any different because they don't know any different. Every time you drink, bathe or otherwise wash yourself in fluoridated water, you are putting that poison into your body. When you take a hot shower, you breath it in with the water mist that results as well as your skin soaking it in. It's effects may not be immediate for you, as they are for some of us, however, every one is affected, though differently, because of the nature of the fluorine atom that composes all fluoride substances and the individuality of each of us. Some day, it will catch up to you too as it did for me, if it has not yet harmed you unbeknownst to you. Protect yourself and all those you hold dear, as well as your friends, your neighbours and all the residents of this municipality by ending this harmful, wasteful and derelict medical malpractice. Please stop the madness. Please stop fluoridation. Declare a moratorium on fluoridation until it can validly and objectively be proven that using this specific acid is safe and effective as claimed by its promoters. That is the only sensible thing to do. (add closing statements)Sample letter #41
I challenge you to look into your mind and into your heart for the truth, and seek out the evidence for yourself: Forget about the fact that money may be literally going down the drain. What we are merely seeking is justice for the weak, the vulnerable and those suffering from chemical sensitivities by eliminating a practice that is primarily harmful to them but also to the whole population that is unaware that their lives are being unknowingly, slowly, adversely affected by adding a contaminant to the water supply. (add closing statements)Sample letter #42
Deliberately contaminating our water, is not a requirement regardless what Health Canada or the Ottawa Public Health medical bureaucracy says. Since the final decision to fluoridate with an untested product rests with the city's Councillors, it's up to them to make an informed decision. The city's health office has often been cited by Ottawa Councillors when questioned on the scientific and legal determination of safety of fluoridation products in question. The health department is unable to provide any animal studies (toxicology studies) and human studies (randomized, controlled clinical trials). But claims that the city conforms to NSF/ANSI 60 standards, which upon further investigation also do not have any such safety studies. From the above it is clear that the city has not done its due diligence on water fluoridation and is simply following directives from other parties who are not responsible for any consequences from their actions. This realization is why other cities are able to eliminate this untested product from their water. Thus removing them from any wrong doing (liability) and continued injury to their constituents should they knowingly continue to add untested products to the water. It is incumbent of you as an elected representative to do your due diligence and provide evidence of safety for hydrofluorosilicic acid as requested or cease this practice until such evidence is provided. (add closing statements)(Based on a letter written by Chris Gupta, thank you Chris, Fluoride Free London Ontario, sometime B4 Mon. Nov. 28, 2011 <= for information only - do not use in your letter) Sample letter #43
Less than 1% of the fluoride added to our water supply gets to the teeth. The rest, more than 99%, goes down the drains in our bathtubs, dishwashers, sinks, toilets, car washes, grass, gardens, etc… into the environment where it was originally banned from being dumped The problem is that it doesn’t just go to the teeth, it also goes to the bones, soft tissue, organs, brain, etc. If it just went to the teeth we would be in much better shape. The biggest contributor of dental health was and always will be access to professional dental care, not artificial water fluoridation. This statement is totally false..... lots of people have lovely cavity free teeth and they have never seen a dentist. 1/3 of the world has far better teeth than we do and they do not see any dentist. Dr. Price visited all kinds of peoples who never saw a dentist and they had cavity-free teeth. My own son is 40 and never had a cavity and I actually kept him away from dentists. I think he has gone 3 or 4 times in his life. Having good teeth has nothing to do with dentists. It takes 3 generations to make good teeth naturally and can be changed in one generation with the proper food and vitamins during their time in the womb and the most important is Vitamin D3 from natural sources. Vitamin D is now being added in infant formula, some food, milk and it can make all the difference in the world for teeth and health. (add closing statements)Sample letter #44
content (add closing statements)Sample letter #45
content (add closing statements) (Based on chapter 25, claim #7, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)Sample letter #46
content
(add closing statements)
(Based on chapter 25, claim #8, The Case against Fluoride <= for your information only - do not use in your letter)
Go to Welcome web page | TAKE ACTION web page | letters to Councillors 1 to 20 | Main information page
|