Quack Team / Barrett LOSES to Darlene Sherrell regarding Fluoride

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache... &ct=clnk&cd=7



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are these hundreds of fluoridation safety studies?
quack \Quack\, n.

1. The cry of the duck, or a sound in imitation of it; a hoarse,
quacking noise. - Chaucer.



2. [Cf. Quacksalver.] A boastful pretender to medical skill; an
empiric; an ignorant practitioner.



3. Hence, one who boastfully pretends to skill or knowledge of any
kind not possessed; a charlatan.

Quacks political; quacks scientific, academical. ... Carlyle

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary

http://www.dictionary.com

Quackwatch is a nonprofit corporation founded by Stephen Barrett, who
bills himself as a retired psychiatrist from Allentown, Pennsylvania.
The stated purpose is to combat health-related frauds, myths, fads,
and fallacies.

Quackwatch claims that water fluoridation "is supported by libraries
full of articles that document its safety and effectiveness - more so
than any other public health measure."

Hundreds of studies?

How often have you heard that "hundreds of studies" have proven water
fluoridation safe and effective? Have you ever seen one? Can you name
one?

In May of 1998 I joined Stephen Barrett's healthfraud list, posting a
short message suggesting that fluoride may be an overlooked cause of
arthritis and fibromyalgia. After much discussion I asked Stephen
Barrett one simple question:

"Can you direct me to any published scientific articles demonstrating
the safety of our current fluoride intake ... or any studies which
indicate that researchers used methods capable of detecting cases of
chronic fluoride poisoning -- but failed to find them -- in any
fluoridated U.S. cities in the past?"
Barrett claims there are "hundreds of pertinent articles," but he
can't produce a single one. He can, however, remember some of the
terms he learned in medical school. Rather than name one of his
hundreds of studies, he simply told me he thinks I'm "delusional."

Stephen Barrett is not the problem ... he is merely a part of the
problem. Others are more than willing to put on the cloak of authority
to dispense worthless advice on the merits of fluoridation.

What other "consumer protection" groups have managed to fool the
public regarding their true purpose?

In June, 1978, the American Council on Science and Health incorporated
in New York. Run by Elizabeth Whelan, A.C.S.H. is an independent
affiliate of the National Council Against Health Fraud. Among its
advisors are Stephen Barrett, MD; Michael W. Easley, DDS; Victor
Herbert, MD; and William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.. The Directors are Fredrick
J. Stare, MD, PhD; and Elizabeth Whelan, ScD, MPH.

A.C.S.H. is often referred to as a front group and mouthpiece for the
food, chemical, sugar and drug industries (American Cyanamid, Archer
Daniels Midland, Chevron, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Exxon, General Mills,
Johnson & Johnson, Monsanto, Pfizer, Union Carbide, Uniroyal, Proctor
& Gamble, CocaCola, and The American Dental Association.) Michael W.
Easley, D.D.S., M.P.H., is an editorial fellow for the A.C.S.H. whose
board of scientific and policy advisors includes Stephen Barrett,
William Jarvis and Victor Herbert, M.D., all members of Jarvis's
N.C.A.H.F.

For more about Elizabeth Whelan and the American Council on Science
and Health, see The Alar Rebellion of 1989, quoted from Rachel's
Environment and Health Weekly, February 20, 1997.

According to some newspapers, Michael Easley is the national spokesman
on fluoridation for the American Dental Association! He appears
regularly with Stephen Barrett's book, The Health Robbers in hand,
along with the the fraudulent ADA pamphlet, Fluoridation Facts. For
years this pamphlet has misrepresented its own references and included
"endorsers," who deny that they actually endorse fluoridation.

Even more alarming is the fact that Ian C. Munro, Ph.D., another of
Barrett's cronies who represent the interests of Monsanto, had managed
to place himself as chairman of the committtee on tolerable upper
intake levels for the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) report from the
Food and Nutrition Board at the National Academy of Sciences.

When the DRI report was introduced at a public meeting in the fall of
1997, Munro allowed American Dental Association spokesman, Herschel
Horowitz, to read the segment on fluoride which attempted to turn back
the clock with regard to the official NAS/NRC dosage figures for
crippling skeletal fluorosis.

At that time the Food and Drug Administration was giving Monsanto's
new arthritis drug Celebrex priority review. The news boosted shares
of both Monsanto and its agreed-to acquirer, American Home Products
Corporation, in heavy trading, as investors anticipated approval of
the first in a new class of enzyme-blockers called "COX-2 inhibitors."
Analysts say the drug could ring up $2 billion or more in annual
sales. Monsanto's G.D. Searle & Co. unit and Pfizer Inc., New York
will commercialize Celebrex. Obviously, it wouldn't be in the best
interests of Ian Munro and/or Monsanto to eliminate one of the major
causes of arthritis in this country by questioning the wisdom of water
fluoridation. Better to ignore rising fluoride dosage levels.

With all substances, "dosage makes the poison" -- meaning that while
very small quantities of fluoride may cause only minor damage, large
quantities taken on a daily basis over a lifetime are known to cause
arthritic changes to the musculoskeletal system, eventually causing
crippling deformities of the spine and major joints. In 1993 the
National Academy of Sciences corrected a long-standing error in
calculating the crippling daily fluoride dosage. By ignoring this
correction in arithmetic, as well as the 1979 correction by the erring
NAS/NRC expert, Dr. Munro's committee could use the erroneous figures
to create a bogus margin of safety. Crippling skeletal fluorosis is
currently the only adverse health effect considered by EPA in setting
their fluoride in drinking water regulation. The pre-crippling
arthritic phase of this disease is not considered to be an "adverse"
health effect. ... just as severely mottled teeth with pits and brown
stain are not considered to be adverse, but simply "cosmetic."

If ever there was a case of hiring a fox to guard the chickens, this
was it! In one swoop, and without a shred of new scientific evidence,
a daily dosage which had been determined to be capable of crippling
after only ten years was being presented as "tolerable." The ADA's
Horowitz dismissed concerns of members of the audience by claiming
that fluorides don't accumulate -- contrary to all previous statements
by NAS/NRC, as well as the World Health Organization, U.S. Public
Health Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and six decades of
scientific observation throughout the world. Ian Munro, industry's
hired gun, and advisor to the American Council on Science and Health,
claimed to be unaware of the content of the 1993 NAS/NRC report on
fluoride for EPA, Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride.

Unfortunately, although release of the DRI report was delayed for more
than a year, and the erroneous fluoride dosage figures were only
partially corrected and still others were injected in the final
version, they have been published by several other individuals and
groups, including the American Dietetic Association ... all based on
the internet pre-publication copy or the final equally flawed version.













*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

I'm not a fluoride expert, but my understanding of it was that once it was
added to the water the rate of tooth decay went down. Is this much true? I
also seem to recall some data about cavity rates elevated in areas of well
water without fluoridation. Anything to this? What about the level of
fluoride? I was under the impression it was very low so as not to be a real
concern. What would be the physiologic/biochemical relationship between
fluoride and arthritis and/or fibromyalgia?

Ilena wrote in message ...
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache... &ct=clnk&cd=7



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are these hundreds of fluoridation safety studies?
quack \Quack\, n.

1. The cry of the duck, or a sound in imitation of it; a hoarse,
quacking noise. - Chaucer.



2. [Cf. Quacksalver.] A boastful pretender to medical skill; an
empiric; an ignorant practitioner.



3. Hence, one who boastfully pretends to skill or knowledge of any
kind not possessed; a charlatan.

Quacks political; quacks scientific, academical. ... Carlyle

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary

http://www.dictionary.com

Quackwatch is a nonprofit corporation founded by Stephen Barrett, who
bills himself as a retired psychiatrist from Allentown, Pennsylvania.
The stated purpose is to combat health-related frauds, myths, fads,
and fallacies.

Quackwatch claims that water fluoridation "is supported by libraries
full of articles that document its safety and effectiveness - more so
than any other public health measure."

Hundreds of studies?

How often have you heard that "hundreds of studies" have proven water
fluoridation safe and effective? Have you ever seen one? Can you name
one?

In May of 1998 I joined Stephen Barrett's healthfraud list, posting a
short message suggesting that fluoride may be an overlooked cause of
arthritis and fibromyalgia. After much discussion I asked Stephen
Barrett one simple question:

"Can you direct me to any published scientific articles demonstrating
the safety of our current fluoride intake ... or any studies which
indicate that researchers used methods capable of detecting cases of
chronic fluoride poisoning -- but failed to find them -- in any
fluoridated U.S. cities in the past?"
Barrett claims there are "hundreds of pertinent articles," but he
can't produce a single one. He can, however, remember some of the
terms he learned in medical school. Rather than name one of his
hundreds of studies, he simply told me he thinks I'm "delusional."

Stephen Barrett is not the problem ... he is merely a part of the
problem. Others are more than willing to put on the cloak of authority
to dispense worthless advice on the merits of fluoridation.

What other "consumer protection" groups have managed to fool the
public regarding their true purpose?

In June, 1978, the American Council on Science and Health incorporated
in New York. Run by Elizabeth Whelan, A.C.S.H. is an independent
affiliate of the National Council Against Health Fraud. Among its
advisors are Stephen Barrett, MD; Michael W. Easley, DDS; Victor
Herbert, MD; and William T. Jarvis, Ph.D.. The Directors are Fredrick
J. Stare, MD, PhD; and Elizabeth Whelan, ScD, MPH.

A.C.S.H. is often referred to as a front group and mouthpiece for the
food, chemical, sugar and drug industries (American Cyanamid, Archer
Daniels Midland, Chevron, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Exxon, General Mills,
Johnson & Johnson, Monsanto, Pfizer, Union Carbide, Uniroyal, Proctor
& Gamble, CocaCola, and The American Dental Association.) Michael W.
Easley, D.D.S., M.P.H., is an editorial fellow for the A.C.S.H. whose
board of scientific and policy advisors includes Stephen Barrett,
William Jarvis and Victor Herbert, M.D., all members of Jarvis's
N.C.A.H.F.

For more about Elizabeth Whelan and the American Council on Science
and Health, see The Alar Rebellion of 1989, quoted from Rachel's
Environment and Health Weekly, February 20, 1997.

According to some newspapers, Michael Easley is the national spokesman
on fluoridation for the American Dental Association! He appears
regularly with Stephen Barrett's book, The Health Robbers in hand,
along with the the fraudulent ADA pamphlet, Fluoridation Facts. For
years this pamphlet has misrepresented its own references and included
"endorsers," who deny that they actually endorse fluoridation.

Even more alarming is the fact that Ian C. Munro, Ph.D., another of
Barrett's cronies who represent the interests of Monsanto, had managed
to place himself as chairman of the committtee on tolerable upper
intake levels for the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) report from the
Food and Nutrition Board at the National Academy of Sciences.

When the DRI report was introduced at a public meeting in the fall of
1997, Munro allowed American Dental Association spokesman, Herschel
Horowitz, to read the segment on fluoride which attempted to turn back
the clock with regard to the official NAS/NRC dosage figures for
crippling skeletal fluorosis.

At that time the Food and Drug Administration was giving Monsanto's
new arthritis drug Celebrex priority review. The news boosted shares
of both Monsanto and its agreed-to acquirer, American Home Products
Corporation, in heavy trading, as investors anticipated approval of
the first in a new class of enzyme-blockers called "COX-2 inhibitors."
Analysts say the drug could ring up $2 billion or more in annual
sales. Monsanto's G.D. Searle & Co. unit and Pfizer Inc., New York
will commercialize Celebrex. Obviously, it wouldn't be in the best
interests of Ian Munro and/or Monsanto to eliminate one of the major
causes of arthritis in this country by questioning the wisdom of water
fluoridation. Better to ignore rising fluoride dosage levels.

With all substances, "dosage makes the poison" -- meaning that while
very small quantities of fluoride may cause only minor damage, large
quantities taken on a daily basis over a lifetime are known to cause
arthritic changes to the musculoskeletal system, eventually causing
crippling deformities of the spine and major joints. In 1993 the
National Academy of Sciences corrected a long-standing error in
calculating the crippling daily fluoride dosage. By ignoring this
correction in arithmetic, as well as the 1979 correction by the erring
NAS/NRC expert, Dr. Munro's committee could use the erroneous figures
to create a bogus margin of safety. Crippling skeletal fluorosis is
currently the only adverse health effect considered by EPA in setting
their fluoride in drinking water regulation. The pre-crippling
arthritic phase of this disease is not considered to be an "adverse"
health effect. ... just as severely mottled teeth with pits and brown
stain are not considered to be adverse, but simply "cosmetic."

If ever there was a case of hiring a fox to guard the chickens, this
was it! In one swoop, and without a shred of new scientific evidence,
a daily dosage which had been determined to be capable of crippling
after only ten years was being presented as "tolerable." The ADA's
Horowitz dismissed concerns of members of the audience by claiming
that fluorides don't accumulate -- contrary to all previous statements
by NAS/NRC, as well as the World Health Organization, U.S. Public
Health Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and six decades of
scientific observation throughout the world. Ian Munro, industry's
hired gun, and advisor to the American Council on Science and Health,
claimed to be unaware of the content of the 1993 NAS/NRC report on
fluoride for EPA, Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride.

Unfortunately, although release of the DRI report was delayed for more
than a year, and the erroneous fluoride dosage figures were only
partially corrected and still others were injected in the final
version, they have been published by several other individuals and
groups, including the American Dietetic Association ... all based on
the internet pre-publication copy or the final equally flawed version.













*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from
http://www.SecureIX.com ***

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:jrGJf.775710$x96.76453@attbi_s72...
I'm not a fluoride expert, but my understanding of it was that once it was
added to the water the rate of tooth decay went down. Is this much true?
I
also seem to recall some data about cavity rates elevated in areas of well
water without fluoridation. Anything to this? What about the level of
fluoride? I was under the impression it was very low so as not to be a
real
concern. What would be the physiologic/biochemical relationship between
fluoride and arthritis and/or fibromyalgia?


Sodium fluoride is a mind control drug first used in nazi germany to keep
prisoners docile.

People do need fluoride but it is calcium fluoride in an organic form.

Use of Sodium Fluoride for mass behaviour control in Nazi Germany
http://www.greaterthings.com/Lexicon/F/Fluoride.htm


Carole
http://www.cellsalts.net
http://www.conspiracee.com

"Carole" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:jrGJf.775710$x96.76453@attbi_s72...
I'm not a fluoride expert, but my understanding of it was that once it
was
added to the water the rate of tooth decay went down. Is this much true?
I
also seem to recall some data about cavity rates elevated in areas of
well
water without fluoridation. Anything to this? What about the level of
fluoride? I was under the impression it was very low so as not to be a
real
concern. What would be the physiologic/biochemical relationship between
fluoride and arthritis and/or fibromyalgia?


Sodium fluoride is a mind control drug first used in nazi germany to keep
prisoners docile.

Is that what you are suggesting the US government is doing? Mind control?

In article ,
Carole wrote:

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:jrGJf.775710$x96.76453@attbi_s72...
I'm not a fluoride expert, but my understanding of it was that once it was
added to the water the rate of tooth decay went down. Is this much true?
I
also seem to recall some data about cavity rates elevated in areas of well
water without fluoridation. Anything to this? What about the level of
fluoride? I was under the impression it was very low so as not to be a
real
concern. What would be the physiologic/biochemical relationship between
fluoride and arthritis and/or fibromyalgia?


Sodium fluoride is a mind control drug first used in nazi germany to keep
prisoners docile.

So I've seen claimed, many times. Never seen any evidence, just the
claims, mostly loons quoting each other, as best I can tell.

People do need fluoride but it is calcium fluoride in an organic form.

Use of Sodium Fluoride for mass behaviour control in Nazi Germany
http://www.greaterthings.com/Lexicon/F/Fluoride.htm

Oh, wow, kiddies, check THAT one out! More hysteria per pixel than
you'll find most other places.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth

"Carole" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:jfRJf.785368$_o.664896@attbi_s71...

"Carole" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:jrGJf.775710$x96.76453@attbi_s72...
I'm not a fluoride expert, but my understanding of it was that once it
was
added to the water the rate of tooth decay went down. Is this much
true?
I
also seem to recall some data about cavity rates elevated in areas of
well
water without fluoridation. Anything to this? What about the level
of
fluoride? I was under the impression it was very low so as not to be
a
real
concern. What would be the physiologic/biochemical relationship
between
fluoride and arthritis and/or fibromyalgia?


Sodium fluoride is a mind control drug first used in nazi germany to
keep
prisoners docile.

Is that what you are suggesting the US government is doing? Mind
control?

Work it out for yourself.
There are no scientific tests to prove that fluoride prevents tooth decay.

There are no tests to prove that lots of stuff does what it is said or hoped
to do. Doesn't make all those things mind control agents. You have sizzled
some neuronal synapses with some bad ****.