Dear Readers,

Last month I was contacted by a fellow at the Emerging Leaders in Science and Society organization and was cordially invited to discuss the state of the public drinking water in the United States. 

Justin Lana (LinkedIn) further elaborated over a series of emails that he had stumbled upon my anti-fluoride exploits and would value my input for a water quality related project that he is working on at ELISS.  You can read much more about this in our correspondence below. 

What piqued my interest in participation and eventually lead to an hour long discussion is that Justin described the goalpost for the ELISS project being some sort of presentation to members of our water regulatory apparatus in Washington.    While I had no hope that this meeting would be any kind of silver bullet for the fluoride issue I felt Justin was open minded and could potentially influence others in this area. After some scheduling, I eventually agreed to meet Justin for lunch at a nearby Indian restaurant to candidly discuss the “current state” issues from my perspective.

For my own protection and journalistic discipline I will sometimes utilize recording devices when traveling or publicly discussing issues of national import, however do not always publish what is captured.  In this case, I felt compelled to admit after the fact that I had recorded almost our entire conversation without his knowledge and also requested publication rights.  I felt the content of the discussion was valuable enough to deserve it’s own article and what you see here is the result.

While initially hesitant, Justin revisited our discussion and bravely gave me the green light so long as I made some important disclaimers.  So that I can never be accused of skewing anyone else’s words, I am also sharing a truncated series of our email exchanges which give the most comprehensive background concerning this situation.  I hope you enjoy!

Mr. Sturmer,

I’m writing to see if you would be willing to meet with me regarding a project that I am currently apart of Drinking Water in the United States: how do we ensure a safe, sustainable, and affordable future in our communities.

I’m working on this project as part of the Emerging Leaders in Science & Society (ELISS) fellowship program. In short, ELISS is a service leadership program for graduate students hosted by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

Duke is one of five partner campuses across the USA participating for 2016. More about ELISS can be found at http://www.elissfellows.org or in the attached program flyer.

ELISS2016_H2Oflyer

Our group will be presenting an overview of Triangle specific drinking water issues to individuals involved in federal water policy in Washington D.C. in June.

Next October we will be holding a local forum to discuss the same issue and we will return to DC in December 2016 to present to national stakeholders.

Our team is divided into various roles: health, environment, economic and society.

Given your view points on fluoride and water, and active role you’ve taken in this fight and against the City of Durham, I believe that your knowledge and the voices you represent would be incredibly valuable to our project.

I would be happy to buy you coffee at a location of your choosing or to come by your office for a meeting.

If you would be willing to meet, please let me know your general availability and a convenient location to meet.

Generally I’m free Mondays (1:00 – 5), Wednesdays (12:30 – 4) and Friday (all day).

I look forward to hearing back from you. Please don’t hesitate to write or call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Justin Lana

__________________

Hi Justin,

Next monday afternoon would probably work.

I read the pamphlet and browsed the website…Before we meet however could you help me understand what you’re looking to accomplish with the meeting? My website is a good resource of information concerning my viewpoints on the issue so I’m just wondering the purpose…

Either way, let me know some time slots that work for you…noon is best for me but if that isn’t doable I can try to make it work.

Thanks,

Corey

___________________

Hi Corey,

Monday at noon works great for me. Just let me know where, and I’ll make sure I’m there on time.

I appreciate you taking the time to read over our site and our pamphlet. To answer you question: My goal for the meeting is to speak with a concerned citizen who has had experience taking up issues with the city and garnering support for your idea. I will be sure to go over all the fluoride information provided on the website before we meet. And while I’m sure I’ll have questions pertaining to the fluoride issue, I really want to learn more about your efforts involved in fighting this issues (roadblocks, avenues of support, etc.)…to learn more about what it takes to make change and where you see your efforts leading.

I hope that makes sense. If not, please let me know.
Looking forward to the meeting!

Justin

Justin T. Lana, MSc-Global Health
PhD Student, Environment
Duke University – Nicholas School of the Environment

__________________

Hi Justin,

Ok, that sounds fine. You might be surprised at the information I have to share so hopefully you come prepared for that!

Why don’t we meet at ————————— which you can look up on Google maps, it’s not far from my office.

Thanks for having open ears,

Corey

__________________

11:30 sounds great.

I will see you then!
Really looking forward to it.
________________________
Hi Justin,
Thank you for the lunch on Monday. I really enjoyed our discussion & hope you got a lot out of it.
I wanted to follow up on a couple items that I mentioned & thought you might find useful in your efforts.

1) I mentioned a WTVD news report that features me and my efforts, very fair presentment of the issue:

2) Public Health Board Meeting ended with me thrown out by a deputy sheriff –

3) Below is an email thread with one of your Duke peers which never amounted to much…but reminded me of the “forum” you mentioned as one of the possibilities with your ELISS work.
Last but not least I wanted to make you aware that I made an audio recording of our discussion on Monday.  This is something I habitually do as a journalistic practice when I give interviews or meet with people from the media for my own legal and personal protection.   I did not inform you of this at the time because I feel that the content and character of discourse changes drastically when an individual is aware that they are being recorded, and I did not want to contaminate our interaction.
I am letting you know this now because I listened to the audio recording on my way to work this morning & felt that it would be a highly valuable contribution to the fluoridation discussion if it were made available online.  Out of courtesy I wanted to know what are your thoughts about me publishing the recording accompanied by an article about our discussion?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Corey
_____________________

Hi Corey,

Thanks for the email. I’m glad that you found the time to meet with me. As I mentioned on Monday, I knew your perspective would be much different than what I’ve encountered so far.
I will check out these links shortly (I’m finishing up with finals this week). I’ve read through your “conversation” with Jennifer Alspach, it’s unfortunate that nothing worked out. I’m not sure who she is or what group she was with, but it sure would have been interesting to see an actual debate take place over the issue of fluoridation.
Corey, I appreciate your informing me that our conversation was recorded; however, I don’t feel comfortable with it shared publicly at this time.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I hope you have a great time in S. Africa and the UAE. I will keep you posted on what I learn moving forward, our local forum, etc.
Thank you
Justin
_____________________

Hi Justin,

I forgot to add the video of me attending the water plant. The superintendent actually gave me a tour of the whole plant but the only piece I was interested in for my purposes was the fluoridation facility.  As mentioned he says casually that it is highly corrosive.

Corey visit Fluoridation Station:

Fluoride Spill in Illinois eats through concrete:

While I’m disappointed that you aren’t comfortable with the publication of our discussion I understand and will respect that.  I want to provide you an opportunity to revisit our discussion in case this gives you reason to change your mind. I know you’re busy but I think this is highly valuable and would be good for the public to consume. You can find the recording at the link below.

[Deleted]

I look forward to hearing about future updates on your work.

Take good care,

Corey

Hi Justin,

How are things going with your project @ ELISS? Did you get a chance to see any of my follow up items?  I was thinking about you when I was out of the country, because I noticed all the bottled water where I was had a detailed label spelling out the parts per million for several different minerals/metals and it reminded me of our discussion.

I have been playing catch up all week since I got back from South Africa & UAE. I hope you’ve been doing well.

_________________

Hi Corey,

Thank you for reaching out. I have also been out of the country (Panama) and have just started to get caught up with my work and ELISS related projects.

It was so great to get away; but coming back into ten days of disconnect from email/work is a little daunting (and I hope excuses my slow response).

ELISS is going well. We have about three weeks before our mid-year meeting in DC. I am not sure if I explained this earlier, but we’ve essentially been “scoping” drinking water issues since January. At our meeting in DC, we’ll meet with other campuses and decide what topic/issue(s)/etc. that we should focus on. I’m looking forward to hearing what the other campuses have to say about their communities as well as getting a little more direction on where we are headed.

As far as our previous discussion, I’ve gotten through the links and spent the last hour listening to our discussion. I have no problem with you posting it online, and you can keep my name attached to it if you like, but I do ask that you provide a little context in the description of where you post it. Namely 1) I’m not a water scholar or expert 2) that this was meant to be a discussion and not a formal interview 3) i was unaware of the recording during our discussion but have since agreed to its posting.

Corey, I look forward to keeping you in the loop. Keep in mind that I’ll be in the Peruvian Amazon for about ten weeks this summer, so if you don’t hear anything it doesn’t mean that I’ve forgotten about you; its just that I’m out of the loop myself or without email.

Thank you,

Justin

Justin T. Lana, MSc-Global Health
PhD Student, Environment
Duke University – Nicholas School of the Environment

Source: GreenMedInfo.com

How To Detox From Fluoride

In today’s world, fluoride is hard to avoid completely. Here’s how to detox your body. 

Adding fluoride to the water supplies has been called murder on a grand scale. But whether or not your town adds it to your drinking water, you’re probably ingesting this toxin every day.

You’re exposed to fluoride if you take prescription drugs like Prozac, swim in pools, or sit in hot tubs.  It’s in conventional produce like lettuce, and commercial bread and bakery products.  It may be in beverages like iced tea, wine, and beer made with municipal water, or in infant formula.  And of course it’s in toothpaste.  It may even sneak into your food from Teflon coated pots and pans.

In addition to increasing the risk of death, fluoride also calcifies the pineal gland and hardens the arteries.  And it increases the risk of hypothyroidism.

Minimizing your exposure to fluoride is important.  But in today’s world, this toxin is hard to avoid completely. That’s why it’s critical to detox your body from fluoride.

Iodine Flushes Out Fluoride

Cleansing your system of fluoride is not the same as getting rid of mercury or arsenic.  Fluoride is not a heavy metal.  It’s a halide in the same family as bromine and chlorine. Fluoride, bromine, chlorine, and perchlorate all bind to iodine receptors in the body and displace iodine.

Perchlorate is a man-made molecule combining oxygen and chlorine.  It’s used for rocket fuel and industrial processes and contaminates our water supplies.

According to Dr. Mark Sircus, the only effective way to detox from perchlorate, fluoride or other halides is with iodine.[i]  Chelation and other methods for heavy metal detox may not be as effective.

Loading the body with iodine displaces fluoride from cell receptors and flushes the fluoride out of the body in urine.

Your body can’t make iodine.  You have to get it from food or supplements.  And unfortunately it’s estimated that as many as 74% of Americans are deficient in this crucial element.

The best dietary source of iodine is seaweed.  Sea vegetables like wakame, nori, kombu (kelp), arame, and dulse are the richest edible sources of iodine.  Just one tablespoon of dried dulse flakes contains about 750 mcg of iodine.  The government’s daily recommended amount is about 150 mcg.

Other good iodine sources include seafood (salmon, lobster, scallops, cod and shrimp).  Cranberries, yogurt, potatoes, strawberries, and navy beans also contain iodine but in much lower amounts.

You can also find seaweed supplements like kelp tablets at most health food stores.

Iodine supplements are also widely available.  Iodoral® tablets contain 5 mg of iodine, and 7.5 mg of potassium iodide.  A typical dose is 6.25mg or 12.5 milligrams of combined iodine and iodide.

Detoxing from fluoride using iodine may trigger symptoms like headaches, agitation, and palpitations as fluoride is released.  To minimize those effects, it’s important to work with a natural health specialist.  According to Dr. David Brownstein in his book “Iodine: Why Your Need It, Why You Can’t Live Without It” an iodine detox should include a nutritional plan as well as unrefined sea salt, selenium, vitamin C, and a vitamin B complex.

www.durhamagainstfluoride.com

The above video was shot October 9, 2014.  I uploaded it the day after but did not publish it or write a follow up article because the remainder of the year was consumed by life and other, more private activism not related to Fluoridation.

However I thought it would be fitting to release it now, in lieu of a recent flurry of news reports regarding the brand new study published by the University of Kent on public water fluoridation.  If you haven’t seen – you should – the study looked at public water fluoridation as a medical intervention and its suggestively high correlation to the presence of thyroid disorders in the population.   Honestly, the study would not be so damning if we were not retrospectively evaluating the epidemiological facts 60 years AFTER Oscar Ewing, Rockefellers, ALCOA, Duke, Edward Bernays and the corporate US “PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE” did brainwash the public into loving their slow death via the sink tap.

This study consequently got MASSIVE press coverage, just see for yourself:

In my opinion, a water shed moment – but we have had them before & the City Council stupidly repeats, as Councilman Steve Schewel does in the video – that public water fluoridation is “safe and effective.”  This is despite the fact that the city has made no visceral effort to have their drugs approved by the FDA, and it looks like the FDA continue to evade evaluating Fluoride for its purported safety and effectiveness.

The publication of the study & a curious note from my Uncle compelled me to pen a letter to City Council about this, and also reminding them of this epic October 9th appearance, which you can read at the conclusion of this update.

Since we have already filed assault charges at the Durham Police Department and nothing was done, my intention here is to simply demonstrate how much the City Council has been wantonly negligent in the face of the blatantly obvious scientific dissent to their position.  Hopefully one day, this evidence can be used to bring them to justice, preferably by indictment and eventual arrest.

TO: William Bill, Diane Catotti, Steve Schewel, Don Moffit, Eddie Davis, Cora-Cole McFadden, Eugene Brown

Happy New Year!

It has been almost four months since I last appeared before you.

If you will remember I demanded last October 9 during a council work session that the Durham County Board of Health kindly submit a formal request to the Federal Drug Administration to test/approve Hydrofluorosilicic acid for being “safe and effective” when orally ingested for the purpose of preventing tooth decay.

This request was made pursuant my understanding of the entities who have jurisdiction to regulate the use and distribution of medicinally intended substances, such as hydrofluorosilicic acid is being applied in this case.  My intention was merely to establish that if the City of Durham collectively endorses the idea of medicating their public water supply with fluoride in practice (they do), that they should at least follow the minimum proper federal laws to have the drugs approved as being safe and effective.

Of course – you very well know that I never bought into the US Health Service & academic Balogna that says drinking fluoride is safe and effective.  I know you know! Because you are apparently treating my October appearance as a “rhetorical request,” as evidenced by the total lack of follow up on my visit last year.

If I am wrong and you have submitted a request to the FDA then I will be the most pleased to hear that you have, and admit I was wrong.  But if that is the case then I would like to know when they expect to begin testing?

In the meantime Council, you might want to start taking this issue seriously because the only reason I am writing you today is due to a very recent publication in the London Telegraph which highlights a brand new study from the University of Kent on public water Fluoridation, that completely damns it!

Fluoride in drinking water may trigger depression and weight gain, warn scientists

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11430087/Fluoride-in-drinking-water-may-trigger-depression-and-weight-gain-warn-scientists.html
Original Study: Water Fluoridation: A Critical Review of the Physiological Effects of Ingested Fluoride
as a Public Health Intervention

Who do you think is liable if this turns out to be true Council?? Who do you think the people will blame? Which side of the fence do you honestly believe is riskier to be on?  Call me selfish but if I were you guys, I would be following the precautionary principle on this one, if for no other reason than to save my own sorry ass!

Precautionary Principle Defined

But honestly Council this damning new study is not really why I’m sharing it with you. You have already proven yourselves in battle to be impervious to even the most mainstream academic and widely accepted news sources of information that discredit the pro fluoride position. Why reverse course and do the right thing now?

It’s not like I haven’t already shared with you numerous legitimate scientific publications which should have resulted in the cessation of water fluoridation, at least since 2011.

It’s not like WTVD didn’t already daftly expose your scam in 2012 with their 7.5 minute report….

It’s not like a Deputy Sheriff did not already escort me out of the subsequent “public health board meeting” which later resulted in Durham’s re-committal to the policy of public water fluoridation….

It was something else…

A curious thing; the telegraph article was shared by my Uncle in an e-mail to me, with the subject line “Vindication.”

He says to me, before sharing the link:

“Here’s more people trying to catch up to Corey.”

The article – which you must read, is one of volumes I have read and tried desperately during the last 3+ years to share with you and/or the public.

But let me be qualify something for you.  I am not “VINDICATED” when such an article appears in the news, and adds to the pile of others I have collected which reinforce my position. I already have more than enough!

I do not like it when scientists find new evidence to suggest drinking fluoride is poisonous.

I do not get any pleasure whatsoever from speaking to you, or feeling compelled to take time off of work so I can try and warn you of the damage you are doing to the population of Durham.

I do not enjoy the social weirdness that accompanies knowing what the government is up to.

I have already read enough of these articles to KNOW that what I’m talking about is correct, so there is no vindication in a reconfirmation of something I already know.  I will ONLY feel vindicated when you collectively start living up to your oath of office, and wake up to your own slavery to the more intimidating layers of your own system

…and most of all, when you decide to STOP FLUORIDATING THE WATER.

Yours Sincerely,

Corey Sturmer

www.durhamagainstfluoride.com

 

TO: Corey Sturmer

FROM: Diane Catotti

Thanks for the additional info.

 

 

Source: The Charleston Gazette

ByKen Ward Jr., Staff writer for the Charleston Gazette

A Raleigh County man pleaded guilty Thursday to repeatedly faking compliant water quality standards for coal companies, in a case that raises questions about the self-reporting system state and federal regulators use as a central tool to judge if the mining industry is following pollution limits.

John W. Shelton, 47, of Daniels, admitted to a charge of conspiracy to violate the federal Clean Water Act, saying he diluted water samples, substituted water he knew to be clean for actual mining discharges and did not keep water samples refrigerated, as required by state and federal rules, court records show.

Shelton was a field technician, and then a field supervisor, for Appalachian Laboratories Inc., a Beckley company that was certified by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection to sample and analyze water discharges from mining operations as part of the Clean Water Act program.

In a criminal charge filed in early September, Assistant U.S. Attorney Blaire Malkin alleged that Shelton took part in a conspiracy from the time of his hiring at Appalachian Laboratories, in 2008, through at least June 2013.

“The objects of the conspiracy were to increase the profitability of Appalachian by avoiding certain costs associated with full compliance with the Clean Water Act and to maintain and increase its revenue by providing its customers and the agencies regulating those customers with reports purporting to show that those customers were operating their sites in compliance with the CWA and thereby allow those customers to avoid fines and other costs associated with bringing their operations into compliance with the CWA and thus encourage and maintain for Appalachian the patronage of those customers,” the charging document alleged.

Appalachian Laboratories officials did not return a phone call seeking comment for this story. Other coal industry officials also did not respond to a request for comment.

In an agreed-to “stipulation of facts” filed in court Thursday, prosecutors and Shelton said that, throughout his time with the company, another Appalachian Laboratories official — referred to as “First Known Person” — stressed to him the importance of “pulling good samples,” a term that was understood to mean samples that would comply with permit limits, not necessarily samples that were taken properly.

Among other things, the stipulation says that employees of Appalachian did not maintain water samples at the proper temperature, by putting them on ice in coolers, unless they knew that DEP inspectors were in the area.

Shelton and other Appalachian employees “falsified and rendered inaccurate” water samples by diluting them with distilled water or replacing them with water they knew to be in compliance with permit standards, according to the stipulation. The document says that Appalachian officials used the term “honeyhole” to refer to water from certain sites that would always test within permit limits and could be used in place of or to dilute “bad water.”

“Each time that Shelton and others at Appalachian diluted the sample water or replaced the sample water with water that would pass, they allowed water that they believed exceeded permit limits to discharge into the waters of the United States,” the stipulation stated.

Shelton pleaded guilty Thursday afternoon before U.S. District Judge Irene Berger and was released on $10,000 bail. He faces up to five years in jail and a fine of up to $250,000 when he is sentenced on Feb. 26, 2015.

U.S. Attorney Booth Goodwin said his office’s investigation into the water sampling issue, conducted jointly with the FBI and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is continuing, but he did not offer further details.

David McLeon, special agent in charge of the EPA’s regional criminal enforcement program, said Shelton’s plea “demonstrates that laboratories and their senior managers who callously place the American people at risk by submitting false reports will be held accountable.”

Prosecutors said Appalachian does water sampling for more than 100 mine sites in West Virginia. Court records, though, do not indicate which mining operations were involved in the falsified samples or how widespread a problem Shelton’s plea indicates exists.

Under the Clean Water Act, companies with water pollution permits are required to take periodic samples and submit reports to the DEP on whether those samples indicate their operations are in compliance with allowed pollution discharge limits. State and federal agencies take some samples themselves, but the majority of sampling is done by companies, with results filed with the government for its review.

Problems with this system have come up before in West Virginia. In 2008, after federal officials sued Massey Energy over widespread water violations at its mines in the state, DEP officials revealed that, for about five years, they had not been monitoring the discharge reports filed with them by the coal-mining industry. Agency officials said that problem has been remedied.

Derek Teaney, senior staff attorney with the group Appalachian Mountain Advocates, said the DEP — the state agency with primary Clean Water Act responsibility in West Virginia — needs to investigate what was going on with Appalachian Laboratories. Teaney said the DEP should audit any water quality sampling performed by Appalachian Laboratories and, perhaps, do an increased program of its own sampling at mines that could have been involved.

“The whole Clean Water Act system relies on self-reporting,” said Teaney, whose group monitors coal industry compliance and files lawsuits against water quality violators. “If that self-reporting can’t be trusted, then the system just falls apart.”

Kelley Gillenwater, a spokeswoman for the DEP, said the agency gave federal investigators all the results it had from water sampling performed by Appalachian Laboratories.

“We haven’t, at this time, conducted any additional testing at those sites because of these allegations but have continued with our routine field sampling,” Gillenwater said.

The DEP Division of Mining and Reclamation’s goal for each quarter is to conduct its own field sampling for at least 25 percent of water pollution outlets, so that all outlets are sampled at least once annually, Gillenwater said.

Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kward@wvgazette.com, 304-348-1702 or follow @kenwardjr on Twitter.

– See more at: http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20141009/GZ01/141009217/1419#sthash.3XvBD0QM.dpuf

Relevant Link: Don O’ Leary is an Orange County Resident Running for County Comissioner in 2016, he also has a lot of great, relevant videos/articles at his site.

My Letter to Orange County Health Director Colleen Bridger After Orange County Referred Our  September 4 Anti-Fluoride Petitions To her

Dear Colleen,My name is Corey Sturmer & I am a 25 year resident of the triangle.  In 2011 I became aware that the city governments of Wake, Durham & Orange county have had a more than 60 year long policy of purchasing waste chemicals (hydrofluorosilicic acid/ silicofluorides, fluorosilicic acid) from fertilizer & aluminum industry & distributing it to the citizens through their water supply, ostensibly to help “prevent tooth decay.”

I happen to know that the propaganda surrounding its efficacy as a preventative health measure came directly from the health & human services department of our federal government, and secondarily through the public health departments of the respective states…Then on downward to each county.  Generally speaking the states’ position has amazingly not changed much in the last 60 years, despite all of the evidence which has come out on the practice since it was first instituted in the late 1950’s.

I was present earlier this month before the board of commissioners of orange county to provide a common sense approach to why this policy should be reversed IMMEDIATELY.  I am e-mailing you because I understand this issue has now been brought to your attention by the commissioners & they are waiting for some advisement from you & the board of health of orange county.

So I would like you to please consider the following as common sense reasons why this policy should end.

Civil Liberty, Informed Consent, Lack of Licensure

 

Nobody in the history of public water fluoridation has ever debated the fact that the alleged purpose of the policy is to help prevent tooth decay.

 

According to the Federal Drug Administration’s code section 201(g)1, definition of a drug, a drug is defined by its INTENDED APPLICATION

 

Source: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/federalfooddrugandcosmeticactfdcact/fdcactchaptersiandiishorttitleanddefinitions/ucm086297.htm

(g)(1) The term “drug” means (A) articles recognized in the official United States Pharmacopoeia, official Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, or official National Formulary, or any supplement to any of them; and (B) articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals; and (C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.
If the county wants to apply fluoride to the water for the purposes of preventing tooth decay, then they are legally bound to have it approved by the FDA as being safe and effective for such an application.  Please take notice that Fluoride has NEVER BEEN APPROVED by the FDA: http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/fda/not-approved/
Since it is impossible for any being to deny that fluoridation is de facto drugging of the water supply, we then need to consider what North Carolina general statutes say about distributing (unapproved) drugs without a license.  It is in fact a Class H Felony to do so, which would mean the offending parties in Orange county are guilty of violating North Carolina state drug laws.See: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_106/GS_106-145.6.pdf

G.S. 106-145.6
§ 106-145.6. Denial, revocation, and suspension of license; penalties for violations.
Adverse Action.
The Commissioner may deny a license to an applicant if the Commissioner determines that granting the applicant a license would not be in the public interest. Public interest considerations shall be limited to factors and qualifications that are directly related to the protection of public health and safety. The Commissioner may deny, suspend, or revoke a license for substantial or repeated violations
of this Article or for conviction of a violation of any other federal, state, or local prescription drug law or regulation. Chapter 150B of the General Statutes governs the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license under this Article.
(b)
Criminal Sanctions.
It is unlawful to engage in wholesale distribution in this State without a wholesale distributor license or to violate any other provision of this Article. A person who violates this Article commits a Class H felony. A fine imposed for a violation of this Article may not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000).

Lastly – drugging the water supply in such a manner violates informed consent laws, which require the patient to be informed & to give their explicit consent before accepting a medical treatment like fluoride.  It may also violate certain individual’s freedom of religious expression since some religions forbid consumption of toxins such as fluoride.  If they don’t even know fluoride is added to their water they could be unwittingly committing blaspheme!

These basic rights should be respected & protected by the county, not deliberately destroyed.

Precautionary Principle
The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action.The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from taking a particular course or making a certain decision when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk.
Colleen – There is no scientific consensus that fluoride is harmless.  In fact quite the opposite.I challenge the board of health to bear the burden of proof that consuming fluoride through the water supply is NOT harmful in any way.  This is a rhetorical challenge because it is impossible for your board of health to do it.  Even the promoters of fluoridation have admitted that drinking fluoride will inevitably cause some degree of dental fluorosis which is the outward manifestation of systemic overexposure.  This is well reported by the center for disease control.  Fluorosis shows up as white spotting & mottling of the dental enamel.  Therefore it can not be refuted that fluoride is detrimental & thus – does not comply with the precautionary principle & should not be a policy!
If dental fluorisis is not enough harm to satisfy you, then please consider these more recent studies which raise enormous doubts about the safety & efficacy of public water fluoridation:
Fluorid deposits in your pineal gland (melatonin center affecting sleep cycles): http://www.icnr.com/articles/fluoride-deposition.html
I appreciate your consideration to this critical public health issue & would like to offer my contact information if you have any questions or concerns about this inquiry.

 

 

Corey Sturmer
Colleen Bridger’s Response to Our Petitions; A Recommendation to Continue Drugging Orange County’s Water Supply

Good afternoon,

I wanted to share with you the information I sent the Board of County Commissioners regarding your concerns about the health effects of fluoride in municipal drinking water.  I’ve attached just a few of the documents I reviewed in making my recommendation for your information.  The key points from this review are:

1)      The preponderance of medical and dental organizations nationally and in North Carolina support community water fluoridation as safe and effective and

2)      Water fluoridation decisions are made by the entities that provide municipal water.  The largest municipal water supplier in Orange County is OWASA and they just this year voted to continue fluoridating their water.

Therefore my recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (and also my recommendation to the OWASA Board when they asked) is that they support the very important, safe and effective public health practice of fluoridating municipal water supplies.

Thank you so much for bringing this issue to our attention.  We can miss important health issues affecting our community and need active residents like you to make sure we are always staying on top of the myriad health threats that we face.  I will continue to monitor the emerging research on the health effects of fluoridating municipal drinking water and if I see any reason to revisit this recommendation, I assure you I absolutely will.

Sincerely,

Colleen Bridger, MPH, PhD

Orange County Health Director

Phone: 919.245.2412 / Cell: 919.612.2053

My Spoken Response to Colleen Bridger on October 7 2014

Letter attached to Colleen Bridger’s Reccomendation Authored by Gary Rozier, a semi-retired Public Health Professor @ UNC

GaryRozierGary Declines to do Interview about Public Water Fluoridation, despite authoring numerous letters in support of it

Dear Gary,

I was recently notified by the Orange County Health Director Colleen Bridger that she & the health department are publicly endorsing the idea of public water fluoridation in response to some recent petitions that the government stop this practice immediately.  After reviewing Colleen’s statement, she appears to be using the attached letter authored by you in 2012 together with several other stated endorsements from various organizations.

I am mailing you Gary because I gather from your letter that you are a highly educated & knowledgeable person on the various machinations & applications of governmental policy, which may result in a city applying a policy like water fluoridation to the population.  I also gather that you sincerely believe that this is an appropriate role for government to play, which is a legitimate position to have if you’re honest about it, which I gather you are being.

It is for these reasons I am interested in conducting an interview with you on the topic of health policy & public water fluoridation.  Would you be willing to participate?  This might be a good opportunity to illustrate to the public why public water fluoridation should be maintained – so I hope you will seize this opportunity.

Let me know your thoughts, & if you’re interested we can worry about logistics.

Corey

 

__________________________________

Corey,  Thank you for the opportunity to participate in a discussion about water fluoridation.  However, I am in phased retirement and not able to take on any engagements. Regards!  GaryRozier

__________________________________

Gary,

Thanks for the reply…

I find your statement interesting – generally most people I know who enter into full or even phased retirement, are able to find MORE time to take on different engagements. But I understand how freely discussing the realities of public water fluoridation may pose a liability to what appears to be your life’s work.  So one way or the other I get the message.Have a good retirement Gary,Corey

 

 

This is a general update & announcement for all readers of DurhamAgainstFluoride.com & in particular residents in the Triangle area of North Carolina.

Housekeeping

Due to time constraints & some new equipment invesments I will be moving this blog format to more of a V (video) LOG format.  I have procured some new broadcasting software & microphones which allows me to publish a much denser report in a much shorter period of time, than I have done in the past.  The events unfold too fast anyway for me to report on them in a timely manner, especially so since I don’t have a crew supporting me, so this will be I hope a more effective way to communicate.

The above video is one such example – but I am still learning so please forgive the lack of polish.  If you’d like to support us, click here.

Announcements

ORANGE COUNTY – 10/7/2014 7:00 PM– I will be appearing before the Orange County Comissioners @ 7PM with other activists in response to the Health Director’s Reccomendation that Orange County Continue Drugging the Population (Source)

CITY OF DURHAM – 10/9/2014 1:00 PM– I will be appearing @ 1:00PM to request that the city seek approval from the FDA that Hydrofluorosilicic acid is safe and effective when ingested for preventing tooth decay.

RequestToAppear

I cover both of these topics in much more detail in the video above.

If you plan to come, it would be nice to know in advance.  E-mail us.

 

On September 4, 2014 there were 4 petitions in the Orange County Comissioner’s inaugural meeting, against the government’s policy of drugging the water supply with hydrofluorosilicic acid.  This video which consists of 4 X 3 minute petitions can be seen below:

In response to our petitions, the commissioners forwarded our petition to the County Health Director, a woman named Colleen Bridger.  When I got wind of her reviewing the evidence, I submitted the following letter for her consideration:

Dear Colleen,

My name is Corey Sturmer & I am a 25 year resident of the triangle.  In 2011 I became aware that the city governments of Wake, Durham & Orange county have had a more than 60 year long policy of purchasing waste chemicals (hydrofluorosilicic acid/ silicofluorides, fluorosilicic acid) from fertilizer & aluminum industry & distributing it to the citizens through their water supply, ostensibly to help “prevent tooth decay.”

I happen to know that the propaganda surrounding its efficacy as a preventative health measure came directly from the health & human services department of our federal government, and secondarily through the public health departments of the respective states…Then on downward to each county.  Generally speaking the states’ position has amazingly not changed much in the last 60 years, despite all of the evidence which has come out on the practice since it was first instituted in the late 1950’s.

I was present earlier this month before the board of commissioners of orange county to provide a common sense approach to why this policy should be reversed IMMEDIATELY.  I am e-mailing you because I understand this issue has now been brought to your attention by the commissioners & they are waiting for some advisement from you & the board of health of orange county. 

So I would like you to please consider the following as common sense reasons why this policy should end.

Civil Liberty, Informed Consent, Lack of Licensure

Nobody in the history of public water fluoridation has ever debated the fact that the alleged purpose of the policy is to help prevent tooth decay.

According to the Federal Drug Administration’s code section 201(g)1, definition of a drug, a drug is defined by its INTENDED APPLICATION

Source: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/federalfooddrugandcosmeticactfdcact/fdcactchaptersiandiishorttitleanddefinitions/ucm086297.htm

(g)(1) The term “drug” means (A) articles recognized in the official United States Pharmacopoeia, official Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, or official National Formulary, or any supplement to any of them; and (B) articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals; and (C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.

If the county wants to apply fluoride to the water for the purposes of preventing tooth decay, then they are legally bound to have it approved by the FDA as being safe and effective for such an application.  Please take notice that Fluoride has NEVER BEEN APPROVED by the FDA: http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/fda/not-approved/
Since it is impossible for any being to deny that fluoridation is de facto drugging of the water supply, we then need to consider what North Carolina general statutes say about distributing (unapproved) drugs without a license.  It is in fact a Class H Felony to do so, which would mean the offending parties in Orange county are guilty of violating North Carolina state drug laws.

See: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_106/GS_106-145.6.pdf

G.S. 106-145.6
§ 106-145.6. Denial, revocation, and suspension of license; penalties for violations.
Adverse Action.
The Commissioner may deny a license to an applicant if the Commissioner determines that granting the applicant a license would not be in the public interest. Public interest considerations shall be limited to factors and qualifications that are directly related to the protection of public health and safety. The Commissioner may deny, suspend, or revoke a license for substantial or repeated violations
of this Article or for conviction of a violation of any other federal, state, or local prescription drug law or regulation. Chapter 150B of the General Statutes governs the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license under this Article.
(b)
Criminal Sanctions.
It is unlawful to engage in wholesale distribution in this State without a wholesale distributor license or to violate any other provision of this Article. A person who violates this Article commits a Class H felony. A fine imposed for a violation of this Article may not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000).

Lastly – drugging the water supply in such a manner violates informed consent laws, which require the patient to be informed & to give their explicit consent before accepting a medical treatment like fluoride.  It may also violate certain individual’s freedom of religious expression since some religions forbid consumption of toxins such as fluoride.  If they don’t even know fluoride is added to their water they could be unwittingly committing blaspheme!  

These basic rights should be respected & protected by the county, not deliberately destroyed.

Precautionary Principle
The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action.

The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from taking a particular course or making a certain decision when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk.

Colleen – There is no scientific consensus that fluoride is harmless.  In fact quite the opposite.

I challenge the board of health to bear the burden of proof that consuming fluoride through the water supply is NOT harmful in any way.  This is a rhetorical challenge because it is impossible for your board of health to do it.  Even the promoters of fluoridation have admitted that drinking fluoride will inevitably cause some degree of dental fluorosis which is the outward manifestation of systemic overexposure.  This is well reported by the center for disease control.  Fluorosis shows up as white spotting & mottling of the dental enamel.  Therefore it can not be refuted that fluoride is detrimental & thus – does not comply with the precautionary principle & should not be a policy!

If dental fluorisis is not enough harm to satisfy you, then please consider these more recent studies which raise enormous doubts about the safety & efficacy of public water fluoridation:

Fluorid deposits in your pineal gland (melatonin center affecting sleep cycles): http://www.icnr.com/articles/fluoride-deposition.html

I appreciate your consideration to this critical public health issue & would like to offer my contact information if you have any questions or concerns about this inquiry.

Corey Sturmer

Her response, after alleged careful deliberation, is as folllows:

Good afternoon,

I wanted to share with you the information I sent the Board of County Commissioners regarding your concerns about the health effects of fluoride in municipal drinking water.  I’ve attached just a few of the documents I reviewed in making my recommendation for your information.  The key points from this review are:

1)      The preponderance of medical and dental organizations nationally and in North Carolina support community water fluoridation as safe and effective and

2)      Water fluoridation decisions are made by the entities that provide municipal water.  The largest municipal water supplier in Orange County is OWASA and they just this year voted to continue fluoridating their water. 

Therefore my recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (and also my recommendation to the OWASA Board when they asked) is that they support the very important, safe and effective public health practice of fluoridating municipal water supplies. 

Thank you so much for bringing this issue to our attention.  We can miss important health issues affecting our community and need active residents like you to make sure we are always staying on top of the myriad health threats that we face.  I will continue to monitor the emerging research on the health effects of fluoridating municipal drinking water and if I see any reason to revisit this recommendation, I assure you I absolutely will. 

Sincerely,

Colleen Bridger, MPH, PhD

Orange County Health Director

Phone: 919.245.2412 / Cell: 919.612.2053