Democracy is not a spectator sport
Previous OurSay Next OurSay Click here to see other OurSays. You have 7 votes per OurSay!
Stephen Mayne, John Thwaites, Fran Bailey, OurCommunity.com.au, CC in “Communities in Control ” Open Ged Kearney, ACTU, Secure Jobs. Better Future., Josh Peak in “Secure jobs for a better future” Closed Cr Cathy Oke, City of Melbourne in “Rio Plus 20 Agenda” Responses up Crikey, House of Representatives, Adam Bandt MP, Your question in “The People's Question” Responses up Campbell Newman in “The Queensland Agenda” Responses up Andrew Demetriou, Amanda Vanstone, Charlie Pickering in “The Australian Republic” Responses up Anna Bligh in “The Queensland Agenda - Part 1” Responses up Prof. Noam Chomsky, Deakin University in “Contours Of Global Order” Responses up 666 ABC Canberra, UC, Canberra Refugee Support, Julie Posetti in “Reporting Refugees” Responses up John Merritt, EPA in “EPA Victoria” Responses up Robert Manne, The Quarterly Essay in “Bad News” Responses up Andrew Demetriou, Kevin Sheedy, Matthew Richardson in “AFL Finals Panel ” Responses up The Climate Agenda, Michael Bachelard, Misha Schubert, Deborah Gough in “The Sunday Age” Responses up You?, Greg Hywood, Mark Scott, Sophie Black in “Australian Media Leaders” Responses up Kelly O’Dwyer, Deb O’Neill , Larissa Waters in “Women in Politics” Responses up David Thodey in “Telstra CEO David Thodey” Responses up The Hon. Martin Dixon MP, Vic SRC in “Victorian Education Minister” Responses up Margaret Simons, Anna Krien, Tim Soutphommasane in “Quarterly Essay” Responses up Malcolm Fraser in “Renewing Democracy” Responses up Q&A in “Q&A - After The Budget - May 16th” Responses up
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.
Sort by: Time

Dear Anna, The question was, 'Will you hold a referendum to allow the people to decide if they want fluoridation in Queensland?' I didn't hear the referendum word. I have, as you suggest, obtained a copy of the 2007 NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council) Review into the Efficacy and Safety of Fluoridation. This report has obvious faults. You would be aware of 'The Case Against Fluoride' - Paul Connett, Beck & Micklem. Just on the point of referendum, there is a good book - 'Fluoride in Australia A Case to Answer' by Wendy Varney. In the 50's the NHMRC put forward provisos in relation to fluoridation. The condition was that "A large proportion of the community should desire that fluoride be added to the water supply, or alternatively, a substantial proportion of the community does not oppose the addition of fluoride to the water. This reflected some compromise for those who cherish civil liberties." A little further on reads, "However, the Council has since decided fluoridation is not a matter for popular debate. It opposes suggestions that a referendum should be held, or public attitudes taken into account." This brings me to the question of the Australian Constitution. (Chapter 1, Part 5-Powers of the Parliament, Section 51-60, Section 51- Legislative Powers of the Parliament) The pertinent part is 'Parliament cannot authorize any form of civil conscription in relation to medical or dental services'. One would say that adding fluoride to the water is not to treat the water, ...but to treat teeth. If you are treating teeth to effect a physiological change, it is indeed a dental service. You make mention of other cities being fluoridated over 4 years ago. A graph showing every major city of Australia was compiled (Diesendorf 1990) showing decay in 10 year old children for 1977 and again for 1987. Over the 10 year period the figures showed decay rates had gone down in every city. All towns, except Brisbane, had fluoridation. However, the graph showed the same trend whether the city was fluoridated or not fluoridated. Perhaps better oral hygiene and better diets are the reason? Why I ask, have so many European countries now removed or never introduced fluoride? You have to admit there is a lot of scientific information out there against the implementation of fluoride. If in doubt, leave it out! The fluoridation product being used is not natural fluoride which was suggested by researcher Dr. H. Trendley Dean many, many years ago as possibly being associated with fewer cavities. May I suggest a government report as further reading. The 1989-1991 Australian Capital Territory 'Inquiry into Water fluoridation in the ACT and the Dissenting Report by Dennis R. Stevenson, MLA. The Dissenting report is some 160 pages. I was quiet embarrassed with your video reply and can only hope you are doing your own homework on this controversial subject. It appears your Health Department is on a set agenda, and certainly not providing you with all the facts. Subject to formal public awareness from both sides, let your community decide via referendum. What are you afraid of....?

WITH RESPECT......WE DO NOT REQUIRE A REFERENDUM.... WE REQUIRE A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL INTO ALL THOSE COMPLICIT IN POISONING THE PEOPLE OF QUEENSLAND.... THOSE WHO HAVE LIED....COMMITTED FRAUD.... IT IS TIME THEY WERE BOUGHT TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR CRIMES..... SEE EVIDENCE OF FRAUD.... READ SCIENTIFIC MATERIAL DATA MATERIAL ( Sodium Fluoride and its effects on our body organs. Please note, that Sodium Fluoride is cumulative. It is an Enzyme Inhibitor that also causes Fetal Deaths, Bone Cancer in Boys and Infertility.) READ THIS ARTICLE BY PROFESSOR PAUL CONNETT WHO EXPOSES THE FRAUD.... - Australian Fluoridation Fraud - Joining the Dots - Paul Connett www.fluoridealert.org November 10, 2008 I would like to draw your attention to four events in Australia which I believe demonstrate the corruption of science needed to propagate the discredited practice of water fluoridation in that country. Just join the dots. Here are the four events: A letter from Pieta-Ray Laut, Executive Director, Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) to Professor Warwick Anderson, Chief Executive Officer, National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), dated 20 February 2007. Note the NHMRC is an agency of the Australian government. See letter at end. The publication of the NHMRC report in November 2007: A Systematic Review of the Efficacy and Safety of Fluoridation. An article attacking opponents of fluoridation by Jason Armfield in the online journal Australia and New Zealand Health Policy, December, 2007, titled: When public action undermines public health: a critical examination of antifluoridationist literature – and my response to it at this same site. The forcing through of mandatory water fluoridation on Queensland in February 2008 by Premier Anna Bligh. This of course, can be coupled with other ongoing efforts to force fluoridation on communities in NSW and Victoria, without giving them a chance to vote on the matter. Elsewhere I have commented at some length on the "Easleyan" hatchet job on people opposed to fluoridation by Jason Armfield, and readers know well of our fruitless efforts to try to inform Premier Bligh on the dangers and ineffectiveness of fluoridation before she forced the practice on Queensland. Here I will focus on the NHMRC (2007) review an the PHAA letter. The NHMRC (2007) report. This report is being cited around the fluoridating world as the final word on the "safety and effectiveness" of water fluoridation. However, as far as addressing health concerns, a careful reading of this report indicates that at best, it is a work of professional incompetence or, at worst, an example of scientific fraud, in which scientific information is manipulated to support a preordained conclusion. There are six fundamental problems with this report. Read full report. http://australianfluorideaction.com/lies-fraud/the-fraud/ -

Dear Ian Buckland, given you would believe what scientists are saying, perhaps you would also believe the reason why over 3,000 Professionals have called for an End to Water Fluoridation which can be reviewed here; http://www.fluoridealert.org/professionals-statement.html. If you wont believe what these and MANY MANY scientists have found that being Fluoride has long term adverse side effects including neurological impacts, then you may as well put your head back in the sand like an ostrich hiding from the truth. i was born in 1959 and had no fluoridation in my water supply yet my amount of fillings is less than many people in Townsville who have had fluoride in their water supply for years. i wont even allow my breeding dogs to drink the fluoridated water because as soon as it was fluoridated here in QLD we started getting deformed pups for the first time in over 30 years of breeding. Since giving our dogs RO water we have had no more deformities, so go figure!!!! All I can say is if you are going to make comments at least research the KNOW and DOCUMENTED scientifically established facts that Fluoride even at the dose rate we have here in QLD will cause irreversible health problems. Just watch the statisitics on osteoporsis increase dramatically % wise over the next decade or more. The reason it will rise is because fluoride leaches calcium from the bones, thats why dental fluorosis is such a problem in countires that have had toxic S6 poison injected into their water systems for years (yes Fluoride is an S6 cumulative poison)