Duke Behnke’s Fluoridation Religiosity on Full Display

2 Comments

Health organizations recommend fluoridation of water
By Duke Behnke, Post-Crescent Media
June 28, 2014

REBUTTAL:

“It’s really called hydrofluorosilicic acid, and it’s a pollutant.”

Duke didn’t even answer this charge. Obviously, he doesn’t want his readers knowing the answer is “yes” [1]. Or perhaps he doesn’t know the truth? Either way, sloppy journalism, mate.

“The optimal level of fluoridation for oral health benefits is 0.7 parts per million (ppm)”… Fluoridation… is safe at the optimal level and the least expensive and most effective way to reduce tooth decay.”

Actually, in terms of safety, “water fluoridation at 0.7 mg/L is not adequate to protect against known or anticipated adverse effects and does not allow an adequate margin of safety to protect young children, people with high water consumption, people with kidney disease (resulting in reduced excretion of fluoride), and other potentially sensitive population subgroups” [2]. And yes, of course, toxic waste generally comes cheaper than pharmaceutical-grade product [3], but let’s not forget the elephant in the living room here – the weakness of the evidence supposedly ‘supporting’ the fluoridation program [4] [5] [6] [7] [8].

“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Surgeon General, American Dental Association, American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and Harvard Medical School all support the fluoridation of water. Neenah has fluoridated its water since 1950.”

Ah yes, where would we be without pro-fluoridation endorsements? “The studies that launched fluoridation were methodologically flawed. The early trials conducted between 1945 and 1955 in North America that helped to launch fluoridation, have been heavily criticized for their poor methodology and poor choice of control communities. According to Dr. Hubert Arnold, a statistician from the University of California at Davis, the early fluoridation trials “are especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” Serious questions have also been raised about Trendley Dean’s (the father of fluoridation) famous 21-city study from 1942… Endorsements do not represent scientific evidence. Many of those promoting fluoridation rely heavily on a list of endorsements. However, the U.S. PHS first endorsed fluoridation in 1950, before one single trial had been completed and before any significant health studies had been published. Many other endorsements swiftly followed with little evidence of any scientific rational for doing so. The continued use of these endorsements has more to do with political science than medical science” [9].

“The doctors and the dentists — and we take their advice and fluoridate.”

Mate, here’s a better idea. Obtain informed consent to treatment before fluoridating [10] [11] [12], and revoke any medical or dental licence from those professionals who oppose the principle of informed consent to treatment [13], making sure they never again work in the field of medicine.

“A person would have to drink about 25 gallons of water to get a toxic dose of fluoride. It says the person would experience severe effects from water toxicity long before having an acute toxic reaction to fluoride”.

This is ‘spin 101,’ but no doubt Edward Bernays would be immensely proud of Duke’s crude attempt. The truth is, Duke is quite deliberately and deviously “confusing a toxic dose with a lethal dose—that is, a dose causing illness or harmful effect as opposed to a dose causing death. Opponents of fluoridation are not suggesting that people are going to be killed outright from drinking fluoridated water, but we are suggesting that it may cause immediate health problems in those who are very sensitive and, with long-term exposure, persistent health problems in others… What we are particularly concerned about is the impact of consuming water at 1 ppm over an extended period of time” [14].

“If you eat enough of anything or drink enough of anything, it’s poisonous to you… Too much of anything is not a good idea. That’s why things are regulated”.

Oh really, Duke? So who controls the DOSE people get each day from consuming fluoridated water and products processed using fluoridated water (in addition to other sources of fluoride) [15] [16] [17] [18]? The answer is, of course, NO ONE [19]!

Advertisements

Author: AFA Mildura

Administrator, Anti-Fluoridation Association of Mildura

2 thoughts on “Duke Behnke’s Fluoridation Religiosity on Full Display

  1. I toured our water treatment facility and was told: 1. Fluoride exists naturally in river water. Of course I didn’t believe him, especially when I saw the hessian bags full of fluoride, stacked floor to ceiling in their “treatment” room. Proudly displayed on each bag was a big sign: “Made in China.” Need I say more?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s