If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Chemically beating children: Pinellas Poisoners Heilman and Talley
SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE REPORT.
This CITIZEN ACTION - this email - is being sent to the Pinellas County (Florida) Sheriff via the email addresses listed below. (I will also cc it to Oregon Attorney General Hardy Meyers via ) While any citizen MAY report suspected child abuse to his or her county sheriff...healthcare professionals are MANDATED to do so. Talk to your dentist today. FLUORINE IS A "MUSCULAR" VIOLENT ("REACTIVE") MOLECULE... PINELLAS COUNTY (FLORIDA) PUBLIC OFFICIALS ARE CHEMICALLY BEATING CHILDREN WITH IT... Christopher Bryson [2004] writes of fluorine: "The same potent chemical that is used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons...is what we give to our children...Fluoride is so muscular a chemical...it's also a grave environmental hazard...[When industry-sponsored scientists c]hanged fluoride's image from poison to panacea...[they] deflect[ed] attention from...the injury that factory fluoride pollution has long wreaked on workers, citizens, and nature." [Bryson C. The Fluoride Deception. NY: Seven Stories Press 2004:xv] Pinellas County "FLUORIDA"... "[M]uch of the fluoride added to drinking water today...is actually an industrial waste, 'scrubbed' from the smokestacks of Florida phosphate fertilizer mills...In a sweetheart deal these phosphate companies are spared the expense of disposing of this 'fluosilicic acid' in a toxic waste dump. Instead, the acid is sold to municipalities, shipped in rubber-lined tanker trucks to reservoirs across North America and injected into drinking water..." [Bryson 2004:xvii]: MOST American counties have drinking water poisoners that use this "muscular", violent ("reactive") molecule. DISNEYLAND's drinking water is poisoned by Orange County poisoners... Is Disneyland DA Tony Rackauckas doing anything about it? I'll cc him (again) via . PINELLAS POISONERS HEILMAN AND TALLEY ARE REFUSING TO DEBATE THEIR POISONOUS BEHAVIOR NOTE: I do NOT want Heilman and Talley punished; I just want them to stop poisoning the water supply. I want ALL poisoners to stop. I am in favor of pardons in advance. See the very end of this post. Bryson [2004:xxi] writes: "[i]t is time to recognize the folly, hubris, and secret agendas that have shackled us...poisoning our water...It is time...to speak truth to power...It will be public opinion and citizen action that strike those shackles free." This citizen action is a SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE REPORT being sent to the Pinellas County (Florida) Sheriff via the email addresses listed below. While any citizen MAY report suspected child abuse to his or her county sheriff...healthcare professionals are MANDATED to do so. Talk to your dentist today. "TOTALLY CRIMINAL" says Dr. Limeback, a dentist... Dr. Hardy Limeback of the University of Toronto in Canada used to be a fluoride promoter - now he's a fluoride protester. Dr. Limeback says fluoridation is "totally criminal." (See The Fluoride Deception by Christopher Bryson [2004:225].) (KEY QUOTE FROM DR. LIMEBACK: "'I did not realize the toxicity of fluoride...I had taken the word of the public health dentists, the public health physicians, the USPHS, the USCDC, the ADA, the CDA [Canadian Dental Association] that fluoride was safe and effective without actually investigating it myself.'" [Limeback quoted in Bryson 2004:xix]) Dr. Paul Connett says fluoridation is causing "unnecessary harm" to "millions"... http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm Some of those millions are children. Causing children unnecessary harm is CHILD ABUSE (see "crippling skeletal fluorosis" discussion below.) REPORTING child abuse is MANDATORY... WHY AREN'T ANTI-FLUORIDATION FOLKS REPORTING FLUORIDATION AS CHILD ABUSE as debates are sought with the poisoners? See CHEMICALLY beating a child, below. LOCAL POISONERS (euphemism "fluoridators") are putting an extremely toxic poison (euphemism "fluoride") into the water supply in Pinellas County and elsewhere... NOTE: Citizen commissioners who *innocently* vote for fluoride poisoning *on the advice of experts* are not poisoners; neither are the workers who handle the toxic stuff on orders. The culprits are the local yes-men experts (parrots for the out-of-town experts who started the mass child abuse)... In Pinellas County, the local yes-men experts are Pinellas County Health Department's John Heilman, MD and Pinellas County Utilities Director Pick Talley... A HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT Local poisoners John Heilman, MD and Pick Talley are creating a hostile environment - yet Pinellas County Administrator Steve Spratt reportedly says of the proposed debate that "he's not certain he wants to subject [John and Pick] to what may be a hostile environment."^^^ ^^^Administrator Spratt paraphrase by MICHAEL SANDLER, St. Petersburg Times Staff Writer Published July 3, 2004, emphasis added (see below). Administrator Spratt's mention of "a hostile environment" reminds me of something I read in The Fluoride Deception: Fluoride AIR polluters did not want to lose lawsuits for polluting the AIR with fluoride - so they put fluoride in drinking water - ostensibly "to prevent cavities" - but actually to prevent huge damage awards in fluoride air pollution lawsuits. (In effect, fluoride polluters have said: "Ladies and gentleman of the jury, how could fluoride in the AIR be causing problems if people are *drinking* the stuff to prevent tooth decay?") Fluoride in the air WAS causing problems. Floride polluters proved this with research - then buried the research and promoted the hell out of poisoning WATER with the stuff... "Fluoridation" was born. Fluoridation is a euphemism for "poisoning the water with small amounts of toxic phosphate fertilizer waste." READ BRYSON'S BOOK. It is Pinellas County Poisoners Heilman and Talley who are creating the hostile environment. Administrator Spratt correctly predicts they may face a hostile environment at a public debate. It is quite natural for people to get hostile when their children are being poisoned "scientifically" by local yes-men experts for the polluters. STUPID MASS CHILD ABUSERS... I think Pinellas poisoners Heilman and Talley are STUPID mass child abusers: Either they can't read or understand what they've read...OR (more likely) they are being PAID^^^ to perpetuate mass child abuse - which is also stupid of course... ^^^There are various ways to pay people to perpetuate the mass child abuse. People who have opposed fluoridation have lost their jobs; so it is possible that Heilman and Talley are behaving dishonestly because they fear they will lose their jobs if they don't behave dishonestly. It's stupid - unconscionable - but understandable. Heilman and Talley's failure to debate their own "facts" is a disgrace - a silent cover-up of the fact that they either don't know the real facts - or they don't care. In regard to their silent cover-up, I very much enjoyed reading Prof. Connett's response to mass child abuser Pick Talley's rejection of debate... Prof. Connett, who holds a doctorate in chemistry and is an environmental chemist wrote to Pick Talley: "I think I know a little more about the 'facts' on this matter than you do and have concluded that your refusal to debate is based upon your fear that your lack of knowledge will be exposed. Hopefully, neither the taxpayers nor the commissioners of Pinellas County will put up with your arrogant posture...In short, you are not protecting the public from 'fear' as you suggest, but from their finding out the truth. In a democracy that is far more frightening. Unfortunately, you have put your trust in authorities upon which one can normally rely for health matters. For most health issues this would be a reasonable thing to do, but in the case of water fluoridation your confidence is sadly misplaced. Ever since the US Public Health Service endorsed fluoridation in 1950 (before one single fluoridation trial had been completed!) it has been part of their agenda to defend this policy at all costs - costs which include the long-term health of the American people as well as their right to informed consent to medication. However, the best and most rational way to resolve this is for you to find spokespersons from any of the agencies on which you rely to defend their assurances themselves. If you cannot do so I am afraid it puts both their position and yours in serious doubt. Certainly, it should not provide the confidence for others [Pick Talley and John Heilman, MD - TG] to put a known toxic substance into the drinking water of every man woman and child in your community at levels which are up to 200 times the concentration found naturally in mothers' milk." See Prof. Paul Connett's FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin #79: Pinellas County: proponents duck debate again. Prof Connett is quoted by Bryson: "'Teeth are the windows to the rest of the body..." [The Fluoride Deception. 2004:219] Dr. Limeback is quoted (same page): "'Dental fluorosis is a bio-marker for systemic fluoride poisoning during early childhood'..." Remember: Dr. Limeback is the fellow who says fluoridation is "totally criminal." REPORTING THE CRIME - anyone can report it. Pinellas County residents, if you don't want to name Pick Talley and John Heilman, MD - then don't - but at least report the crime. DOCUMENT your report so law enforcement can't say later that they didn't know. Please copy me if you report via email... Here are the phone number and email address for the Pinellas County Child Protection Investigation Division: General Information (727) 582-3819 http://www.co.pinellas.fl.us/sheriff...ontactmain.htm I will cc Pinellas County Sheriff Child Protection Investigation Division via I will also cc the following Pinellas County Sheriff addressees: ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; WHO SHOULD REPORT? Again, anyone MAY report - inside or outside of Pinellas County. But Pinellas County MDs, dentists, nurses, and chiropractors are MANDATED to report if they so much as SUSPECT child abuse. Read The Fluoride Deception. Quote from it in your suspected child abuse report. Ask your dentist to read The Fluoride Deception and report. Ask your chiropractor to read it and report. Ask your MD to read it and report. All persons - licensed or not - who are serious about ending the poisoning of water supplies nationwide should KEEP reporting until the toxic chemical child abuse ends. IS IT "IDIOTIC" TO REPORT FLUORIDATION AS CHILD ABUSE? Some (most?) anti-fluoridation folks are going to say, "People will think we are idiots if we report it as child abuse." NEWSFLASH: Many (most?) people ALREADY think anti-fluoridation folks are idiots. **I** used to think anti-fluoridation folks were idiots. Well I never actually thought them idiots - I just thought them over-zealous in their opposition to a highly diluted poison ("fluoride") that couldn't really be all that toxic at low concentrations. Boy was I wrong! Anti-fluoridation folks are NOT idiots and fluoride is NOT safe at low concentrations. See The Fluoride Deception by Christopher Bryson. [2004] Fortunately, the number of people who think anti-fluoridation folks are idiots is dwindling. The Fluoride Deception will make that number dwindle faster. I think it is fantastic that anti-fluoride folks have long been informing regulators of the facts. I think it a "healthcare" abomination that local experts (like John Heilman, MD and Pick Talley) have ignored anti-fluoridation folks - hence this post. I think it is high time that the LAW ENFORCEMENT part of the executive branch of government start hearing about mass child abuse being approved by the legislative branch and regulatory parts of the executive branch... Suspected child abuse reports are MANDATORY for health professionals who suspect child abuse - but anyone may report. FLUORIDATION IS INDEED MASS CHILD ABUSE... Prof. Connett says that it will be very difficult for government officials "to speak honestly" - but they must - "to protect millions of people from unnecessary harm." http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm DENTAL FLUOROSIS vs. CRIPPLING SKELETAL FLUOROSIS... Physically beating a child is known to produce external bruises and sometimes terrible injuries inside the body... CHEMICALLY beating a child (fluoridation) RATHER QUICKLY increases the frequency of staining/mottling of tooth enamel (dental fluorosis), an outward sign of terrible things happening inside the body. The terrible things happen SLOWLY at the low fluoride concentrations in drinking water... For example, according to our own National Academy of Sciences, "crippling SKELETAL fluorosis" may occur in 10 years' time by consuming 5 liters of water per day at fluoride levels that are HALF the EPA's permissible level. According to EPA's own estimates, 3% of Americans drink 5 liters of water per day! Who knows but that far less than 5 liters of water per day of 1ppm water over a lifetime does the same thing - or causes skeletal fluorosis that isn't crippling - but perhaps causes lesser effects? There are a LOT of things fluoride may cause - cancer is one of them - hip fractures is one - attention deficit hyperactivity disorder/ADHD is another - autism is another - Alzheimer's is another... READ The Fluoride Deception by Christopher Bryson. [2004] THE DISNEYLAND DA I mentioned fluoridation as child abuse to Disneyland DA Tony Rackauckas. DA Tony got elected by a "chiropractic" attorney Michael J. Schroeder, former chairman of the California Republican Party. DA Tony may just listen to suspected child abuse reports from chiropractors. I'm still hoping Orange County doctors of chiropractic will help. See $25,000 for OC chiros for Disneyland antifluoridation work? http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2643 I will cc this post to Disneyland DA Tony and via local newspapers: and I'm still hoping Disneyland DA Tony will go to court and stop fluoridation at Disneyland before Prof. Connett's upcoming 1st Citizens' Conference on Fluoride. No word back from the UCLA chemistry department on whether they will be using my $1000 donation to send someone to Prof. Connett's conference or to fly Prof. Connett to lecture. See The Disneyland DA and The Fluoride Deception... http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2629 I've asked before and I'll ask again: Are there ANY anti-fluoridation folks who think it's NOT toxic chemical child abuse to put the toxic poison "fluoride" into the water supply? No one has answered so far... Dr. Connett, you have been silent on this point. Why? Do you think putting the toxic poison "fluoride" into the water supply is NOT child abuse? If so, I would be happy to fly to Pinellas County to debate you on this point at the July 8 Great Fluoride Debate. (As you indicate in your Bulletin, it doesn't look like mass child abusers Pick Talley or John Heilman, MD are going to show.) In any debate we might have, I would of course be pointing out that fluoridation is NOT the only form of mass child abuse actively supported by "health" professionals... OTHER CHILD ABUSE ACTIVELY SUPPORTED BY "HEALTH" PROFESSIONALS... OBs are knowingly closing birth canals up to 30% and gruesomely (sometimes fatally) manipulating most babies' spines at birth. OBs are also routinely robbing babies of roughly half the blood they would have transfused to themselves immediately after birth. See Disneyland DA Rackauckas: *More* mass child abuse by OBs... http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2644 See also: $25,000 for OC chiros for Disneyland antifluoridation work? http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2643 PREGNANT WOMEN: OBs are indeed knowingly closing birth canals up to 30%. For simple PROOF - and simple instructions on how to allow your birth canal to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%... See I ain't no Semmelweis, but... http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2591 See also: ACOG birth crime video evidence http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2300 MAYBE **NOT** FLUORIDATING IS "TANTAMOUNT TO CHILD ABUSE"? I just found this...I suspect it is propaganda... "DOCTORS' leaders urged local authorities yesterday to introduce fluoride into water supplies...dentists have described the levels of painful decay suffered by some children as tantamount to child abuse." --Sam Lister, June 16, 2004 Timesonline http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...147422,00.html Yep, I think it's propaganda... Bryson [2004:xix] writes: "A largely sympathetic official review of fluoridation by the British government in 2000 found that...water fluoridation may be responsible for 15 percent fewer cavities." Some people think fluoride prevents cavities altogether! On the same page, Bryson quotes the late Dr. John Colquhoun, the former chief dental officer of Auckland, New Zealand, and a fluoride promoter turned critic: "How many cavities would have to be saved to justify the death of one man from osteosarcoma?" WHAT?! NOT USING SUNBLOCK IS CHILD ABUSE! "Dad Charged For Not Using Enough Sunblock On 12-Year-Old...Boy Severely Burned...CAPE MAY COURT HOUSE, N.J. -- A man has been charged with child abuse for not applying enough sunblock to his 12-year-old son before a day at the beach....Walter McKelvie Jr., 43, of Vineland, was indicted Tuesday and charged with one count of child abuse and neglect in the July 20 incident, in which he took his mentally disabled son to the beach in Wildwood...McKelvie told investigators he put sunblock on the boy, but the indictment said he failed 'to apply enough sunscreen causing severe sunburn to R.M.' while he had custody of him...If convicted, McKelvie could face up to 18 months in prison." http://www.local6.com/news/3349031/detail.html *USING* SUNBLOCK IS CHILD ABUSE? The conclusion might be surmised from the comments of Joseph Mercola, DO on the just quoted "no sunblock is child abuse" article... "This is a great opportunity for me to remind you how important it is to protect your skin from sunburns, but sunblock is not the way! Sunblock can increase your risk of cancer and is a toxic chemical...Sunblock products claim to prevent sunburns but don't screen out harmful UVA light that causes skin cancer. In fact, sunblock screens out UVB light that promotes the natural generation of vitamin D." http://www.mercola.com/2004/jun/12/sunblock_abuse.htm Regardless whether we are slathering toxic chemical sun block on our children's skin... WHY are we putting poison in their drinking water? Read the comments of all the European countries that have rejected this practice... http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm WHAT A BIZARRE WORLD WE LIVE IN HERE IN AMERICA! "BETTER LIVING THROUGH CHEMISTY" (I think that is what Disneyland's Monsanto exhibit said years ago. Is that exhibit still there? Anyone know?) While most European countries have rejected fluoridation... Ireland has not... See Disneyland's toxic drinking water (also: Bizarre Irish fluoride blarney) http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2636 Again, Prof. Connett says fluoridation is causing "unnecessary harm" to "millions"... http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm Some of those millions are children. Causing children unnecessary harm is CHILD ABUSE. Why would we NOT report child abuse - assuming we believe poisoning children's drinking water is child abuse... Anti-fluoridators - you do agree that poisoning children's drinking water is child abuse, right? Again, Bryson [2004:xxi] recommends CITIZEN ACTION: "[i]t is time to recognize the folly, hubris, and secret agendas that have shackled us...poisoning our water...It is time...to speak truth to power...It will be public opinion and citizen action that strike those shackles free." This citizen action (this email) is a SUSPECTED CHILD ABUSE REPORT being sent to the Pinellas County (Florida) Sheriff via the email addresses listed below. While any citizen MAY report suspected child abuse to his or her county sheriff...healthcare professionals are MANDATED to do so. Talk to your dentist today. Here now, is Prof. Connett publicly taking Pinellas Poisoners Heilman and Talley to task for hiding instead of debating their own "facts"... I hope Prof. Connett keeps trying to debate the child poisoners - but in the meantime - I hope Prof. Connett will encourage people to join me in reporting them for mass child abuse - or debate me on this issue on July 8th. (Let me know ASAP Paul - so I can buy a ticket to Florida in advance.) THE FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK http://www.fluoridealert.org FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin #79: Pinellas County: proponents duck debate again. July 3, 2004 Dear All, Citizens in Pinellas County, angered by the County Commissioners' decision to force fluoridation on country residents, have been trying over the last few weeks to get the officials, on whose confident assurances they relied, to participate in an open public debate with Dr. William Hirzy and myself. These promoters include Pick Talley, director of the Pinellas County Water System Utilities, Dr. Heilman, director of the Pinellas County Health Department and Dr. Kasem, the Vice-president of the local Dental Association. Dr. Heilman was invited no less than three times to appear on a local radio station to debate the issue -and he excused himself three times. Letters I have sent to him have remain unanswered. Dr. Kasem has shown no inclination to debate, even while he sends long (very long) letters to the St. Petersburg Times proclaiming the virtues of the practice with the usual hyperbole with respect to benefits and the usual dismissal when it comes to health concerns. Of the three Pick Talley has been most forthcoming in articulating his reasons for refusing to debate. I have printed below the correspondence we have had on this issue below, but first, I have printed today's St. Petersburg Times article describing the event which is scheduled for this coming Thursday July 8. In the SPT article Mr. Talley expresses puzzlement that we should want to come to Pinellas County to debate the issue when we could be making our case to "higher officials" in NYC or Washington, DC. He may have been unaware that Dr. Hirzy has given testimony on this very matter before a US Senate committtee hearing, but he should have been aware that I also testified on this matter in Washington. In one of my letters to him (see below) I pointed out that my involvement in this issue included, "an invited presentation to the National Research Council's panel investigating the toxicology of fluoride in water in August, 2003." Paul Connett __________________________________________________ ____________ TODAY'S ARTICLE IN ST PETERSBURG TIMES (SECTION B) http://www.sptimes.com/2004/07/03/Tampabay/County__Fluoridation_.shtmlhttp ://www.sptimes.com/2004/07/03/Tampabay/County__Fluoridation_.shtml ----------------------------------- County: Fluoridation forum would really be a protest Pinellas officials say the debate with fluoride opponents would serve no purpose. "The people that oppose fluoride are going to oppose it no matter what I say," one official says. By MICHAEL SANDLER, Times Staff Writer Published July 3, 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CLEARWATER - It's being billed as "The Great Fluoride Debate." But only one side is likely to make an argument. Citizens for Safe Water, a political action committee formed last year by fluoride opponents, has challenged Pinellas County officials to defend a 2003 decision to add fluoride to the county water supply. The group has rented Harborview Center in Clearwater for the evening of July 8 and is flying in two chemistry experts to make the case against the cavity-fighting chemical. So far, county officials have declined. They say they are concerned the group is staging a protest disguised as a civil discussion. "We are not going to convince those opponents," said Pick Talley, the county's utilities director.. "They are pretty set with their set of facts. I don't think there is any public purpose to continue to debate the issue when it shouldn't be decided by debate. It should be decided by scientific fact." Last month Pinellas officials began adding fluoride to the county's water supply, which serves about 600,000 people. Pinellas officials say fluoride in the water is proven to help fight tooth decay. St. Petersburg, Tampa and Hillsborough County have been adding fluoride to their water for years, as have communities serving more than 160-million people across the nation. County officials say they relied on the advice of some of the nation's leading health authorities, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, the American Medical Association and the American Water Works Association. Dr. Paul Connett, a chemistry professor at St. Lawrence University in Canton, N.Y., and William Hirzy, a senior scientist from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, are prepared to challenge that information. "I have made a blanket offer to any community that is confronted with fluoridation issues to come down and debate," Connett said by phone from his office at the university. "But as you have probably discovered, the proponents lack that confidence when anybody knows something about the issue." The two have challenged Talley and Dr. John Heilman, director of the county health department. Both have declined. Talley said the county allowed ample time for debate at public hearings prior to last year's vote. Talley questioned why Connett and Hirzy have decided to make their case in Pinellas, rather than with higher level public health officials. "One hundred and sixty million people are getting fluoride now,"Talley said. "Why come to Pinellas and have the debate here, when he is a lot closer to New York City or Washington, D.C.?" Heilman said fluoride has been a "strong weapon" against tooth decay since the 1940s and has been proven over time to be safe in small doses. "The people that oppose fluoride are going to oppose it no matter what I say," Heilman said last month. "They certainly aren't going to convince me otherwise." Opponents say fluoride is dangerous, especially to children, and that there are no health studies proving hydrofluorosilicic acid, the type of fluoride being added in Pinellas, is safe. They say fluoride is the byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry, a fact that both Talley and Heilman do not dispute. Peter Glickman, president of Citizens for Safe Water, and 14 others tried to get the county's charter review commission to add language to the November ballot that would ask voters to decide if they want fluoride in the water. The committee declined, saying that was a proper policy decision for the county commissioners. He said he hopes the county will see the value in a spirited debate. "If I had it in my power, I'd love for them to send the very best people who propose fluoride," Glickman said. "I wish they could fly someone in from the CDC. We really want the best from both sides so some conclusion can be reached." Connett teaches environmental chemistry and toxicology and uses fluoridation to illustrate the intersection of "science and politics." He and other members of the St. Lawrence faculty convinced the community in Canton, N.Y. to stop fluoridating the water last year. "When we have a chance to talk with people who have an open mind, we win hands down," Connett said. "What's difficult is when people have a closed mind." County Administrator Steve Spratt said he is concerned about the structure, saying he's not certain he wants to subject anyone representing the county to what may be a hostile environment. Glickman said he has contacted the League of Women Voters, hoping they can send a moderator. He has yet to receive confirmation. "What is the agenda? How is it supposed to work?" Spratt asked. "If it's a demonstration, a protest event, we will have to weigh that with what kind of contribution we can make." __________________________________________________ ______________________ Connett's correspondence with Pick Talley, Director, Pinellas County Utilities. The sequence of letters. 1) Connett's challenge to Talley, June 25. 2) Talley's response to Connett's challenge, June 28. 3) Connett's response to Talley's refusal to debate, June 28. 4) Talley's response, June 29. 5) Connett's final letter, June 29. All correspondence was copied to the Commissioners and Dr. Heilman. And for the record: 6) Talley's opinion piece in the St. Petersburg Times, June 10. 7) Connett's letter to the editor responding to Mr. Talley's opinion piece, June 11(unpublished). ________________________________________________ 1) Connett's challenge to Talley, June 25. Dear Mr. Tally, It has just been brought to my attention that you may be unaware that I have publicly challenged you to defend the practice of water fluoridation in an open public debate. My challenge went to you in a letter I sent to the St. Petersburg Times on June 11, in response to your comments published in this same paper on June 10. I thought on such a major issue that the SPT would feel obliged to print my letter. I was wrong -they did not. However, I am serious about this invitation. Moreover, I am sure based upon the confidence that you have in this measure that you will not find it difficult to marshall your arguments in a formal debate. Failing that I would assume that you can find someone from the many authorities you cite in support of this measure to fill your place. This same debate challenge has been issued several times to Dr. John Hileman. Perhaps the two of you can combine as a team in this matter. If so then we could make it a two versus two debate with William Hirzy, Ph.D joining the side opposed to fluoridation. In getting your two person team together I am sure Dr. Kasem the President of Upper Pinellas Dental Association (phone 727-796-2183) would be most helpful in this matter. I am sure you would agree that in a democratic society that when a public health issue reaches this level of controversy, the public is best served when they hear information from experts on both sides of the matter with the opportunity for fair exchange and rebuttal. I look forward to hearing from you on this matter. Below I have printed a short biographical sketch of myself and the letter I sent to the SPT. Paul Connett. __________________________________________________ ________________ 2) Talley's response to Connett's challenge, June 28. Dr. Paul Connett: I received your email inviting me to be part of a team to debate fluoridation of public water supplies. As you know, Pinellas County joined the majority of United States urban water supplies by instituting fluoridation earlier this month. I would never recommend that any public water agency adjust its treatment processes based on the outcome of a debate. It is not possible in a public debate to authenticate the validity of ones "facts", or establish whether stated facts are recognized by the medical/scientific community. Such public debate using unaccepted "facts" can unnecessarily alarm the public. For these reasons, I decline your offer. There are larger public utilities in your state, a lot closer to your home, that are fluoridating water. I would suggest you approach one of them. Very truly yours, Pick Talley Director of Utilities PINELLAS COUNTY UTILITIES (727) 464-3438 Tel (727) 464-4152 Fax __________________________________________________ ______________ 3) Connett's response to Talley's refusal to debate, June 28. Mr. Talley, You completely miss the point of my challenge to debate. The "facts" in question are those that you have shared with the commissioners --the ones you used to assure them of the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation. These are the "facts" that need to be scrutinized. I do not believe the public should allow you the luxury of claiming all the "facts" to yourself and claim that yours and yours alone are "recognized by the medical/scientific community." As the commissioners have gone ahead with this archaic practice based upon your set of facts and assurances, then you should be obliged to demonstrate that you understand those facts and can support those assurances, and that you are completely up-to-date on the matter. I hold a doctorate in Chemistry and I have spent the last 8 years doing independent research on the scientific literature on fluoride's toxicity and water fluoridation. This involvement included an invited presentation to the National Research Council's panel investigating the toxicology of fluoride in water in August, 2003. I think I know a little more about the "facts" on this matter than you do and have concluded that your refusal to debate is based upon your fear that your lack of knowledge will be exposed. Hopefully, neither the taxpayers nor the commissioners of Pinellas County will put up with your arrogant posture. In short, you are not protecting the public from 'fear' as you suggest, but from their finding out the truth. In a democracy that is far more frightening. Unfortunately, you have put your trust in authorities upon which one can normally rely for health matters. For most health issues this would be a reasonable thing to do, but in the case of water fluoridation your confidence is sadly misplaced. Ever since the US Public Health Service endorsed fluoridation in 1950 (before one single fluoridation trial had been completed!) it has been part of their agenda to defend this policy at all costs - costs which include the long-term health of the American people as well as their right to informed consent to medication. However, the best and most rational way to resolve this is for you to find spokespersons from any of the agencies on which you rely to defend their assurances themselves. If you cannot do so I am afraid it puts both their position and yours in serious doubt. Certainly, it should not provide the confidence for others to put a known toxic substance into the drinking water of every man woman and child in your community at levels which are up to 200 times the concentration found naturally in mothers' milk. I urge you again to find someone from the agencies in which you have put your trust to defend the science on which their endorsement of fluoridation is based. Finally, to quote the French writer Joseph Joubert, " 'Tis better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it." Sincerely, Dr. Paul Connett __________________________________________________ ________________________ 4) Talley's response, June 29. Dr. Connett, I an not persuaded by your reply to alter my position as stated in my previous email. Very truly yours, Pick Talley Director of Utilities PINELLAS COUNTY UTILITIES (727) 464-3438 Tel (727) 464-4152 Fax _________________________________________________ 5) Connett's final letter to Talley, June 29. Dear Mr. Talley, Your unwillingness to defend your position in public on such a serious issue, in which you have been a key player, is very disturbing to me. The willingness to promote something -with enormous confidence -without being familiar with the details appears to a be frequent characteristic of fluoridation promoters and is merely a continuation of the advice contained in a White Paper distributed by the American Dental Association in 1978, where they wrote: "Individual dentists must be convinced that they need not be familiar with scientific reports of laboratory and field investigations on fluoridation to be effective participants in the promotion program and that nonparticipation is overt neglect of professional responsibility." I assume that the same advice has been given to Utility Directors like yourself. I also assume that your position is not an elected one, because I doubt very much that the voters of Pinellas County would tolerate such an arrogant posture, and I define arrogance as "ignorance backed up with over-confidence." Sincerely, Paul Connett __________________________________________________ ____________ AND FOR THE RECORD Here is Pick Talley's OPINION PIECE in the St. Petersburg Times June 10, 2004, and my unpublished letter in response (June 11). 6) Health agencies offer solid support on fluoridation Letters to the Editor Published June 10, 2004 This is to address the letters appearing in your paper questioning the County Commission's decision to fluoridate Pinellas County's public water supply. To my knowledge, Pinellas County Utilities is the largest water utility in the southeastern United States that was not fluoridating its water supply. Approximately 163-million U.S. residents receive fluoridated water in the public water supply of their community. Fluoridation began in public water supplies in the United States in 1945. Since that time, there has been an enormous amount of research on the health effects and benefits of fluoridation. Fluoridation has been found to benefit the general public by the reduction of size and number of dental cavities, particularly in children. There has been an enormous amount of research on the potential health effects of adding fluoride to the public water supply. These studies recognized by the mainstream medical and regulatory authorities have not identified deleterious health effects for the general population. The following organizations either recommend or support the addition of fluoride to public water supplies for the benefit of public health: World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control, American Medical Association, National Science Foundation, Florida Department of Health, American Cancer Society, U.S. surgeon general, American Heart Association, American Association of Public Health Dentistry, American Academy of Pediatrics, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Environmental Protection Agency, American Public Health Association, American Dental Hygienists Association, International Association for Dental Research and the Pinellas County Health Department. In August 2003, the County Commission reviewed a request from the state and county health departments to fluoridate the water supply for the beneficial health of its residents. The commission reviewed the reports and recommendations of many of the organizations listed above. The commission held a public hearing at which residents for and against fluoridation gave testimony. The commission also reviewed a survey of 737 customers of the county water system. Fifty-one percent of the customers surveyed supported fluoridation, 12 percent opposed and 37 percent did not know or had no opinion. The commission decided, based on the overwhelming preponderance of information provided, that Pinellas County's public water supply should be fluoridated for the benefit of its residents. There are a number of misunderstandings among those who have written in opposition. Additional information that may be helpful in reviewing this issue: We cannot find any record of a referendum for Pinellas County Utilities on the issue of fluoridation of the county water supply. The toxicity of fluoride is no more of a threat to humans in the concentrations included in a public water supply than other chemicals that are added to the water supply for the protection of public health. There have been no reports of the alleged health concerns (mentioned by) those who oppose fluoridation in the communities around us or across the United States, where fluoridation has been a common practice for many years. The county does no original research on the materials it uses to treat its water to improve the public health reliability of its supply. It relies on the advice of those agencies that have the best expertise and resources in the world to make these determinations. Only those materials meeting the most stringent scientific analysis are used, as recommended by those agencies. Reports and studies that allege public health risks from fluoridation should go through the same level of scrutiny by agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academy of Sciences to prove the validity of their results. Should these studies stand up to strict scientific protocols, then those agencies would notify the public and the public utilities of potential concerns. Readers who may have concern about fluoridation should direct their questions to the agencies listed above for specific health information. -- Pick Talley, director, Pinellas County Water System Utilities __________________________________________________ ____________________ 7) Connett's letter to the editor responding to Mr. Talley's opinion piece, June 11, 2004. It is interesting to note that when I spoke to Mike Sadler who wrote today's piece in the SPT he said that he had read this letter, even though it was not published. Letters-to-the-Editor, (not-published) St. Petersburg Times, June 11, 2004. Dear Editor, I would like to respond to Pick Talley's letter to the editor of June 10. In this letter Mr. Talley, the director of the Pinellas County Water System Utilities, defends the the County Commission's decision to fluoridate Pinellas County's public water supply. Mr. Talley begins by pointing out that "Approximately 163-million U.S. residents receive fluoridated water" but fails to point out that this represents over half of those drinking artificially fluoridated water worldwide. The vast majority of countries do not fluoridate their water, and yet according to figures readily available on the web site of the World Health Organization, children's teeth in non-fluoridated industrialized countries are just as good, if not better, than American children's teeth. As far as America is concerned the largest survey conducted in the US indictated a saving of less than one tooth surface out of 128 tooth surfaces in a child's mouth for children living in fluoridated communities compared to non-fluoridated ones and even this miniscule difference was not shown to be statistically significant (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990). Mr. Talley continues by stating that since 1945 there have been enormous number of studies which have demonstrated the safety of the practice, and yet the largest review of these studies todate found not one could be given a grade A quality rating (McDonagh et al., 2000). To point out just one of many concerns with the research conducted todate is the almost total absence of data of fluoride bone levels of the American people. This despite the fact that we know that 50% of each speck of fluoride consumed each day from water and other sources concentrates there and that the first symptoms of fluoride's well documented damage to bone and ligaments is identical to arthritis (DHHS, 1991). According to the CDC(2002) 1 in 3 Americans are now suffering from arthritis. We are flying blind on a possible connection to lifelong exposure to fluoride with this and several other key ailments, including a possible connection to Alzheimers Disaease (Varner et al, 1998) and the lowering of IQ in children (Xiang et al, 2003). Mr. Talley cites a long list of organizations which support fluoridation, but fails to point out that this list was highly predictable once the US Public Health Service gave its premature but enthusiastic support to fluoridation in 1950, before one trial had been completed. Nor does Mr. Talley acknowledge that not one of these organizations is prepared to field someone to defend their position in an open public debate on the matter even when invited to do so by organizations such as the American College of Toxicology and the US EPA. If Mr. Talley doubts this assertion let him find someone to debate the issue with me. I would be happy to come down to Pinellas County and present my concerns; concerns, which are based on a careful eight year review of the scientific literature. Meanwhile, those who are interested in checking some of the details can review my arguments at http://www.fluoridealert.org/50reasons.htmhttp://www.fluoridealert.org/50r easons.htm Water fluoridation started in a different age. It is time to follow the lead of most European countries and put an end to the absurd notion of using the public water supply to deliver medication, whether individuals agree to the practice or not. Forcing such a practice on people takes governmental arrogance to a whole new level, especially when those who support the measure most vocally are totally incapable of defending the measure on a public platform. How about it Mr. Talley, can you find someone to debate with me on this? Dr. Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry, St. Lawrence University, Canton, NY 13617 315-379-9200 __________________________________________________ _____________________ END Dr. Paul Connett's FAN CAMPAIGN Bulletin #79: Pinellas County: proponents duck debate again. Copied to: Pick Talley Director of Utilities PINELLAS COUNTY UTILITIES (727) 464-3438 Tel (727) 464-4152 Fax Dr. Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry, St. Lawrence University, Canton, NY 13617 315-379-9200 Three last matters... 1. Prof. Connett said to Pick Talley... "Unfortunately, you have put your trust in authorities upon which one can normally rely for health matters. For most health issues this would be a reasonable thing to do..." If Prof. Connett is referring to modern "scientific" medicine - his statement may not be true. It is a fact that most surgical behaviors of modern medicine are rather obvious crimes. For example, in their most frequent surgical behavior toward women, OBs are slicing vaginas en masse (euphemism "routine episiotomy") - surgically/fraudulently claiming they are doing everything possible to OPEN birth canals - even as they CLOSE birth canals - up to 30%. OBs are also slicing ABDOMENS en masse (euphemism "c-section") - surgically/fraudulently claiming they have DONE everything possible to open birth canals even as they close birth canals up to 30%. Most surgical behaviors (numerically speaking) are obvious crimes - and the vagina slicing causes the most hospital admissions in America!! See See Criminal medical CAM at Hawai'i's John A Burns School of Medicine http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2256 2. Confucius say: "Man who fart in church sit in own pew." Who is "farting in church" here? Me (for suggesting that children must be finally given the protection of the child abuse statutes)? Or the yes-men expert public officials (Heilman and Talley) who are chemically beating children - blindly relying on obvious fraud as they poison the water supply? The answer seems obvious to me - but I am sincerely interested in hearing the reasoning of any antifluoridation folks who don't think poisoning children's water should be reported as child abuse. Prof. Connett says: "For those who would call for further studies, I say fine. Take the fluoride out of the water first and then conduct all the studies you want. This folly must end without further delay." http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm I would say to the anti-fluoridation folks: First do the minimum required by law when children are being poisoned - REPORT - THEN debate - and keep reporting the child abuse until it ends. 3. As usual, I am in favor of pardons in advance for MDs. MDs are just academic prime cuts forced through this culture's most powerful mental meatgrinder - medical school. I don't want to see Pick and John punished. I just want them to stop chemically beating children. Sincerely, Todd Dr. Gastaldo Today is Independence Day. We are now reportedly independent of Britain. British Broadcasting Corp. reporter Christopher Bryson is helping us gain our independence from toxic phosphate fertilizer waste polluters. Happy 4th of July everyone. I hope that July 8 Great Fluoride Debate is productive. Please don't fail to do what is the MINIMUM required of health professionals when child abuse is so much as suspected: REPORT. Pinellas County child protection email is . ANYone can report. Please copy me todd@chiromotion if you report. Thanks. This email will be archived for global access within 24 hours in the Google usenet groups archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "Chemically beating children: Pinellas Poisoners Heilman and Talley. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|