Here we go again, all the usual pro-fluoridation propaganda . Let’s break it down a little…
a. “Health officials say scientific evidence has “overwhelmingly found fluoridated water is safe and prevents tooth decay” in children and adults”.
Actually, that’s bullshit. When the authors of the York Review examined this so-called evidence, they concluded, “We were unable to discover any reliable good-quality evidence in the fluoridation literature world-wide” .
b. “The proven public and dental heath benefits are why the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention proclaimed community water fluoridation as ‘one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century,'” said Wendy Trute, a health officer for Grand Traverse County”.
Well of course Wendy, a paid and brainwashed fluoridation whore, would say that. We would expect no less, because, “those that cite this probably have no idea how incredibly poor the analysis was that supported this statement. The report was not externally peer reviewed, was six years out of date on health studies and the graphical evidence it offered to support the effectiveness of fluoridation was laughable and easily refuted” .
c. “Opponents of city fluoridation processes claim fluoride is a toxic substance and should not be in public water supplies, but health officials say opponents can “misunderstand and be alarmed by inaccurate and false information about fluoridation found on the Internet including so-called ‘studies’ alleging fluoride harms public health””.
First of all, this toxic shit they use to fluoridate cannot be denied as anything less than what it is . Secondly, “No one denies that plenty of rubbish appears on the Internet. But just because a published study can be found using the Internet does not invalidate it. In fact, scientists now do much of their reading of the scientific literature online. The Fluoride Action Network maintains a Health Effects Database on its Web site, which provides citations, excerpts, abstracts, and in some cases complete pdf files of many published studies. Proponents would do well to read some of these papers, rather than trying to dismiss them because they are available online” .
d. “Trute said many items used in daily life can be considered toxic if used incorrectly or in the wrong concentrations”.
Ah, the old “Dr. Carnie” trick. Deliberately muddying the water between concentration and dose. We’ve caught these slimy little bastards doing this many times: “Why does Dr Carnie continue to perpetuate the elementary confusion between concentration and dose of fluoride? While engineers can control the concentration of the fluoride added to the water supply no one can control the dose people get each day. This will depend on how much water they drink and how much fluoride they get from other sources”  .
e. “A local dentist, Dr. Vince Mack, DDS, also spoke at the news conference and said city residents would have more dental problems, including higher dental bills, if the city ended the fluoridation program.”
Oh how “original”! Let’s drag out a little local dentist to do the dirty work with a white coat on. I guess this dentist conveniently failed to mention that when fluoridation has been halted in the past, decay rate rises do not necessarily follow  or that tooth decay trends are barely different between fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries   . This is filthy, devious fear-mongering of the highest order by the criminal pro-fluoridation cartel.
f. “Dr. Michael P. Collins, MD, MS, pointed to multiple surveys that show dental care to be the most commonly unmet need of families, especially in low-income areas. He claims if low-income families were unable to compensate for un-fluoridated water with other forms of fluoride, they would also likely be unable to afford the increased dental bills that would come later in life from tooth decay.”
Wow, the publication thought by throwing a few letters after this guy’s name, we were all going to just take his word for it? LOL. Whatever. Actually, we’ll let the York Review authors expose his devious line of spin by highlighting the fact that, “the evidence about reducing inequalities in dental health [is] of poor quality, contradictory and unreliable” .
g. “Eliminating the protection of fluoride in our water at this time would absolutely be a huge step backwards,” said Dr. Collins”.
Tell that to all the countries getting along just fine without fluoridation of water, “Doctor” Collins! .
h. “Water fluoridation is one of the hallmarks of a modern, desirable community that values and helps protect public health”.