A comprehensive rebuttal of the most commonly repeated claims of the pro-fluoridation lobby, extracted from the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluoride (see below).
Perhaps the most comprehensive book ever produced as a direct and serious challenge to the pro-fluoridation case. According to one respected reviewer, "the authors have produced a well researched, cogently argued, and very readable text that summarises historical, political, ethical, toxicological, and epidemiological scientific data behind drinking water fluoridation" (ISFR 2010).
If you've ever wondered why fluoridation has been such a heated 'battleground' issue for so many years, once you see the multitude of rational arguments against the practice, this phenomenon will be easier to understand.
Watch as two emeritus professors of Chemistry present a powerful case against the practice of water fluoridation, followed by an audience question and answer session.
The Fluoride Action Network develops and maintains the world’s most comprehensive online database on fluoride compounds. The information in the database is free and available for anyone seeking to educate themselves.
SLWeb's huge Bibliography of Scientific Literature on Fluoride, where one can access abstracts for most of the references, and whole papers or excerpts for many. Virtually all of these listings are peer-reviewed articles from mainstream medical, dental, and scientific journals worldwide, and most offer legitimate reason for concern regarding the health effects of fluoride toxicity.
The International Society for Fluoride Research Inc. is an independent non-profit organisation which promotes the sharing of scientific research on all aspects of inorganic and organic fluorides by hosting international conferences on fluoride research and publishing quarterly.
Ten years of extensive research culminated in the publication of this masterpiece of investigative journalism by Christopher Bryson. Bryson also appears on a powerful video interview produced by FAN, which makes for essential viewing for the serious historian.
Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation
The promoters of fluoridation will have you believe that professionals do not oppose water fluoridation, however this video demonstrates otherwise. This FAN production (one of FAN’s most popular) presents a powerful indictment of the water fluoridation program through interviews with a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, three scientists from the National Research Council’s landmark review on fluoride, as well as dentists, medical doctors, and leading researchers in the field.
The NRC Review of 2006
On March 22, 2006, the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies of Science released a 450-page review of fluoride toxicity. While proponents of fluoridation have long claimed that the safety of fluoride is a “settled” question, the NRC report emphatically undermines this contention. The NRC report identifies a staggering number of fundamental questions about fluoride’s safety that have yet to be adequately addressed.
Biochemistry, Toxicology & Pharmacokinetics of Fluoride
The following four resources cover the areas of biochemistry, toxicology and pharmacokinetics in relation to fluoride, offering great insights for the serious researcher of fluoride science. The first is a basic overview by Connett (2012); the second is an extensive lecture by Mullenix (2009); the third featured as a full chapter in the NRC Report (2006); and finally we have a comprehensive review by Barbier et al. (2010), published in Chemico-Biological Interactions.
A Major Challenge to the Victorian DHS
It is rare that a mainstream newspaper will, in Australia, allow unfiltered coverage on serious challenges to its official state pro-fluoridation lobby. But on September 18th, 2009, the Sunraysia Daily newspaper did just that, allowing an unedited, full page publication of a letter of concern, which was co-signed by a number of professionals. It also included direct challenges to the then Chief Health Officer, Dr. John Carnie [parody]. When Carnie failed to respond, a following letter was published, again with challenges. These two publications marked a significant morale boost for safe water campaigners and opened up many doorways for the local community to take anti-fluoridation concerns more seriously. Eventually, the only way the Department could fluoridate the water supply was by force, not by consent. These publications can still serve as valuable resources and examples for other local fluoridation battles.
Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation
The promoters of fluoridation will have you believe that professionals do not oppose water fluoridation, however this video demonstrates otherwise. This FAN production (one of FAN’s most popular) presents a powerful indictment of the water fluoridation program through interviews with a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, three scientists from the National Research Council’s landmark review on fluoride, as well as dentists, medical doctors, and leading researchers in the field.
The NRC Review of 2006
On March 22, 2006, the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies of Science released a 450-page review of fluoride toxicity. While proponents of fluoridation have long claimed that the safety of fluoride is a “settled” question, the NRC report emphatically undermines this contention. The NRC report identifies a staggering number of fundamental questions about fluoride’s safety that have yet to be adequately addressed.
Biochemistry, Toxicology & Pharmacokinetics of Fluoride
The following four resources cover the areas of biochemistry, toxicology and pharmacokinetics in relation to fluoride, offering great insights for the serious researcher of fluoride science. The first is a basic overview by Connett (2012); the second is an extensive lecture by Mullenix (2009); the third featured as a full chapter in the NRC Report (2006); and finally we have a comprehensive review by Barbier et al. (2010), published in Chemico-Biological Interactions.
A Major Challenge to the Victorian DHS
It is rare that a mainstream newspaper will, in Australia, allow unfiltered coverage on serious challenges to its official state pro-fluoridation lobby. But on September 18th, 2009, the Sunraysia Daily newspaper did just that, allowing an unedited, full page publication of a letter of concern, which was co-signed by a number of professionals. It also included direct challenges to the then Chief Health Officer, Dr. John Carnie [parody]. When Carnie failed to respond, a following letter was published, again with challenges. These two publications marked a significant morale boost for safe water campaigners and opened up many doorways for the local community to take anti-fluoridation concerns more seriously. Eventually, the only way the Department could fluoridate the water supply was by force, not by consent. These publications can still serve as valuable resources and examples for other local fluoridation battles.
