WHO to review Fluoride Guidelines
Robert Pocock of VOICE, a campaigner for healthy drinking water, and specifically against the addition of toxic fluoride to the water supply, has said that the WHO is revising its Fluoride Guidelines, which were introduced in a rather clandestine manner. There may be just too much information coming to light about fluosilicates, a particularly nasty poison which is actually an industrial waste, and which in some countries is added to drinking water.
For background data on the fluoridation debate, there are several articles on this site, which you can access by typing the word fluoride in the top "search" box and clicking Search.
A dedicated site for fluoride information: http://www.fluoridealert.org/
A good overview in one article: http://www.fluoridealert.org/absurdity.htm
And a recent article from the US: ARE WE BEING POISONED?
A record of historical events around fluoride:Fluoride Timeline - From 1855 to 1997: Interesting!
Behavioral Effects of Fluorides
Fluoridation: New Report Bolsters Fluoride-Cancer Link
Think Fluoride is Healthy? Find Out the Shocking Truth in "The Fluoride Deception"
Here the message from Robert Pocock, Ireland:
From: "Robert Pocock"
To: "Josef Hasslberger"Today I came across a letter from the Coordinator of the WHO Water Sanitation and Health Programme, a Dr Jamie Bartram. Coincidentally, he shared his views with us at the Drinking Water Seminar in Brussels on Oct 27-28th 2003 including the welcome admission that the new WHO Fluoride Guidelines (2003) are (sic) looking (again) at fluosilic acid. The new Drinking Water Guidelines were intended to be published in 2003 but this investigation among others would delay their publication until 2004, Jamie told me, implying an early January date.
This deadline has clearly been missed and that may be not unconnected with the pressure we have been exerting on Mrs Wallstrom to prohibit its use in drinking water in the EU Directive.
In his letter of 30th Dec 2003 to the Arab Healthy Water Association he said that " We have recently implemented an international expert meeting on nutrient minerals in drinking water and will be publishing the outcome in 2004." The question this letter referred to was magnesium in water.
Did you know of this expert group meeting ? I can't find it on Google. Who might have attended it from Europe ?
I am alarmed at the likelihood of this expert meeting recommending fluoride in drinking water ie another deception along the lines of the CODEX Fluoride recommendations in food we already discussed earlier in 2003.
After sending this information out to some friends on other continents, I received another message from Robert, about the history of fluoridation, which I believe may be interesting for a full understanding of the problem:
From: "Robert Pocock"
To: "Josef Hasslberger"
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:45:13Dear Josef,
Many thanks for your excellent help in trying to alert some potential allies to oppose this WHO nonsense which has gone on for over 40 years since some unprincipled professionals, mainly form US & Europe, begat this uniquely anglo-saxon monster -- the rest of Europe and Asia have long since rejected artifiicial fluoridation of water.
I think the genesis of the WHO's support for artificial fluoridation would be of interest as it reveals the hollow foundation on which the WHO's endorsement is based. Besides the fluoride promoters invariably refer doubters to this so-called endorsement by the WHO, a body that many still trust unquestioningly. Please See extract below.
The other important input is from Developing Countries, specifically the 23 countries who attended the 3rd International conference on Fluorosis and Defluoridation held in Chiang Mai, Thailand in Nov 2000.
There is an excellent elucidation of the issue by Dr A.K. Susheela of the Indian Fluorosis Research & Rural Development Foundation (Proceedings of Indian natn Sciences Academy [PINSA] B68 No 5 pp 389-400; 2000). Dr Susheela who is probably the world's foremost expert on fluorosis, referred in her paper to the serious criticism levelled at the WHO Fluoride Monograph of 2000, initially published in 1970 and which was (and still is now in Jan 2004, as well as the "Drinking Water Guidelines") in the process of being revised.
"Scientists around the globe and many organisations including UNICEF and ... the Chiang Mai delegates ... have made serious criticism of the unsuitability of the new monograph AND HAVE SOUGHT FOR A COMPLETE REVISION OF THE MANUSCRIPT. THIS IS DUE TO INFORMATION EXPLOSION IN THE SECTOR WHICH CAN NOT BE OVERLOOKED." page 397. Capitals are mine for emphasis..
The paper contains similar, comprehensive dismissal of the WHO "Guidelines and Standards" which also resulted from the Chiang Mai conference.
Crucially, 13 of the 23 nations at this conference have replaced the WHO "guideline " value for fluoride in water of 1.5Mg/L by the lower level of 0,5 Mg/L as more protective of their people. These countries exposed to naturally occurring fluoride (CaF) have first-hand evidence of fluoride's deleterious effects and they do not have any faith in WHO advice that is clearly ill-conceived and as we know, was politically and not scientifically inspired.
(Unfortunately I can not find the www reference for the above paper and have failed to contact Dr Susheela despite many attempts).
There is a curious irony in that Ireland, a country virtually free of naturally occurring fluoride, now experiences fluorosis (dental fluorosis) of 37% + among 15Yr olds; this is after 40 years of following the WHO "Guidelines" recommending that drinking water contain a 'desirable' level of fluoride of 1.5Mg/L.(http://www.doh.ie/publications/coral.html page 36)
Our government has dutifully followed this WHO advice albeit adding only 1Mg/L of fluosilic acid !!
So the WHO has succeeded in uniting East and West in high levels of fluorosis. While the East was born with it in its groundwater, we have had it thrust upon us by naive politicians. If ever a European politician needed a total make-over, it is our Health Minister, Micheal Martin who still claims fluoridation rests on sound science and has no harmful effects.
Best regards,
RobertWhat is a lie? T'is but the truth in masquerade - Byron
The World Health Organisation
"Nevertheless, during the final hours of the session, when only 55 to 60 of the 1,000 delegates from 131 countries were still present, all bills that had not been accepted were collected into one and voted upon, including a statement on fluoridation."An extract from -
Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma by George L Waldbott, M.D., in collaboration with Albert W Burgstahler, Ph.D., and H Lewis McKinney, Ph.D.
Published by Coronado Press, Inc. Lawrence Kansas 1978 [423pp]
Chapter 16, page 283-284Despite extraordinary success in obtaining endorsements in the U.S.A., fluoridation received only limited acceptance abroad, the Fédération Dentaire Internationale being one of the few exceptions, and advocates decided to push for endorsements at the international level. In 1958, the year following the AMA Report, the World Health Organisation (WHO) established an Expert Committee in Geneva to study fluoridation. At least five of the seven committee members had promoted fluoridation in their respective countries. Two well-known American proponents, Dr J. W. Knutson and Professor H. C. Hodge, presented the case to the committee. Some of Hodge's research had been financed by the Ozark Mahoning Chemical Company and some by now defunct Atomic Energy Commission, both of which were confronted with serious fluoride disposal problems. Another member of the Expert Committee, Professor Yngve Ericsson of the Dental School, Karolinska Institute, University of Stockholm, one of Europe's most prominent advocates of fluoridation, had been a recipient of USPHS research grants and subsequently received royalties from Sweden's toothpaste industry. My offer to furnish reports on poisoning from fluoridated water was rejected. To the credit of WHO, their1958 document stated:
"This report contains the collective views of an international group of experts and does not necessarily represent the decisions or the stated policy of the World Health Organisation". 11
The official endorsement followed 11 years later. On July 23, 1969, fluoridation was brought up again at the 22nd World Health Organisation Assembly in Boston. The resolution recommending the
measure appeared on the agenda daily but was strongly opposed and blocked by delegates from Italy, Senegal, the Congo, and elsewhere. G. Penso, head of the Italian delegation, expressed his concern regarding "this mania of our century to add additives to anything." He pointed out that there are unknown amounts of fluoride in the air we breathe and in the food we eat. He cautioned particularly about the damage to future generations.12Nevertheless, during the final hours of the session, when only 55 to 60 of the 1,000 delegates from 131 countries were still present, all bills that had not been accepted were collected into one and voted upon, including a statement on fluoridation. The mildly-worded resolution urged that member states examine the possibility of introducing fluoridation in those communities where fluoride intake from water and other sources "is below the optimal levels." It also requested the Director General "to continue to encourage research into the etiology of dental caries, the fluoride content of diets, the mechanism of action of fluoride at optimal levels in drinking water, and into the effects of greatly excessive intake of fluoride from natural sources, and to report thereon to the World Health Assembly."13
References:
11 World Health Organization Report No. 146. Geneva 1958.
12 Italy's WHO Delegate Opposes Fluoridation: "Must be Cautious." Boston Sunday Herald Traveler, July 10, 1969, Sect. C-7
13 World Health Organization: Resolution of the World Health Assembly. Fluoridation and Dental Health. WHO Chronicle, 23:512, 1969.
See also:Fluorides: Their Effect on the Thyroid, Alzheimers and CFS
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Saturday January 24 2004
updated on Wednesday November 24 2010URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/01/24/who_to_review_fluoride_guidelines.htm
Related ArticlesFluoride - no thank you!
Bradford (UK) - A motion to say "no" to fluoridation of Bradford's water supply was passed by a large majority on July 1, 2003. The Motion was presented to the Lord Mayor and Members of Bradford Council (UK) by Councillor Martin Love of the Green Party. It passed by a large majority and no amendments were brought, showing the full support of Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens and most of... [read more]
July 03, 2003 - Sepp HasslbergerFluoride and IQ
The practice of dumping toxic-waste fluorosilicates into public water supplies in the name of fighting tooth decay has just received another damper. According to a recently released Chinese study, there is a clear relation between fluoride levels in the water that is consumed by a population and low Intelligence quotient scores of children who do the consuming. I wonder why there is a generalized push to introduce fluoridation in some... [read more]
August 25, 2003 - Sepp HasslbergerAvoid fluoride to cure IBS
The following letter has appeared in the UK magazine PROOF! What works in alternative medicine. February 2002, Vol 6, No.7, page 4. (PROOF! is published by What Doctors Don't Tell You). Chris Gupta Avoid fluoride to cure IBS. Re irritable bowel syndrome (PROOF! vol 5 no 2). I was surprised to see no mention of avoiding fluoride, which can cause 'non ulcer dyspeptic ' complaints with symptoms similar to IBS.... [read more]
June 28, 2003 - Chris GuptaFood, Not Fluoride, Reduces Cavities
This is a good follow up on the earlier post: "Spin Doctoring: Toxins - Fluoride" as it always boils down to food but they can't make any money with this most effective of all remedies... Chris Gupta ------------------------------------------- Food, Not Fluoride, Reduces Cavities (CONTACT LETTER TO YOUR OFFICIALS INCLUDED) From New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation July 2004 Cavities occur in 66% of U.S. preschool children, and more often... [read more]
July 15, 2004 - Chris GuptaSpin Doctoring: Toxins - Fluoride
Here is a book that further expands on the post 'Fluoridation Revisited' discussion of Spin doctoring: ..."The drive to encourage public acceptance of fluoride was handed over to Edward Bernays, known as the father of PR, or the original spin doctor, and the man who helped persuade women to take up smoking. "You can get practically any idea accepted," Bernays explained, "if doctors are in favour. The public is willing... [read more]
June 09, 2004 - Chris GuptaFluoride and Old Lace
The UK government is pushing to lace drinking water with fluoride The way is being prepared by a law which will exempt water companies from legal responsibility for adding an industrial poison to communal water supplies. The International Fluoride Information Network, in its latest bulletin, says that "unfortunately, it is too late to influence the House of Lords who incredibly voted to modify the water bill to allow water... [read more]
July 31, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
