Posts Tagged ‘dds’

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

Submitted By: Parker Emmerson

CITIZENS AGAINST WATER FLUORIDATION LETTER NUMBER ONE

Dear Town Council Members, OWASA, The Board of Aldermen and Citizens of Orange County, NC,

Parker Emmerson

Parker Emmerson

I hope all is well with you.

I am writing to notify you that there is a toxic, hazardous substance currently added to the Orange County water supply. This substance is fluoride. After repeated inquiries into this matter with the OWASA board members, we have still not been told what kind of fluoride is added to the water. My peers who oppose the addition of the level 3 or 4 health hazard toxin known as fluoride suspect that the kind of fluoride currently added to the water is fluorosilic acid and that, when this kind of fluoride hits one’s stomach acid, it transforms into Hydrogen Fluoride, a level four (4) health hazard as rated by the NFPA fire diamonds seen:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fluoride

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFPA_704 (Key to reading NFPA fire diamonds)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluoride (Level 3 Health Hazard, Toxic, Irritant)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluorosilicic_acid (Level 3 Health Hazard, Toxic, Corrosive)

http://www.sciencelab.com/msds.php?msdsId=9924083 (Level 3 Health Hazard)

http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/r?dbs+hsdb:@term+@rn+16961-83-4 (Level 4 Health Hazard)

Fluosilicic Acid: “Agent in water fluoridation, in preliminary treatment of hides and skins, and to reduce reflectivity in glass surfaces; disinfectant for copper and brass vessels; impregnating ingredient to preserve wood and to harden masonary; chem intermediate for aluminum trifluoride, cryolite, and fluorsilicates; electroplating agent for chromium.

Furthermore, Sodium fluoride pills are a prescription drug with NDC (National Drug Code) # 0288-1106-10 and NDC # 68032-382-12 (to name just two) – their primary purpose to deliver fluoride (fluorine) to the teeth through what I consider the pseudo-science of its being beneficial when contained in the saliva and “bathing the teeth” in fluoride continuously throughout the day. At least ten different citizens have challenged the OWASA board’s continued addition of fluoride (a by-product of the aluminum and fertilizer industries by their own admission on their website) with valid, cogent arguments against the addition of this drug into the water supply against their consent.

We got nowhere with the board.

Notably – the recently dismissed “State Dentist” Rebecca King (See:Tense meeting with DHHS leader Wos leads to firing of NC’s top dentist) – gave her “testimony” (“expert” opinion) on the subject in a meeting that was exempt from public comment, and she used a tactic coined by Orwell as “Double Speak” on more than one occasion.  She stated word for word, and I have this on record,

“Fluoride is not a by-product of the fertilizer industry. Fluoride comes from the same phosphate rock that is used to create fertilizer – it does not come from fertilizer.”

So, somehow these two things (phosphate mining and fertilizer production) are not correlated even though fluoride comes from the same phosphate rock used to produce fertilizer? If fluoride were not pumped into the public water supplies of practically every North Carolina township, what would the phosphate mining companies do with all of the fluoride?

They would have to pay to dispose of it as what it is – toxic waste, which they do not want to do.

We confronted the OWASA board about this specific inconsistency in the pro-fluoride argument (position), among many, many others (for emphasis), and each time, they denied it – repeatedly stating that the fluoride they used did not come from the fertilizer and aluminum industries, until finally – Corey Sturmer, an anti-fluoride activist brought out into the open a print out of their own website (water quality report card) that stated their source of fluoride was phosphate rock from byproducts of the fertilizer and aluminum industry.  See:

Finally, they were forced to have one of their operational employees come to the meeting and give a statement about how the fluoride they used actually did come from the by-products of a North Carolina phosphate rock-mining plant which supplied the fertilizer industry. We have all of these encounters on video.

This was just one example of misleading double-speak they used. They also denied direct response to our questions/points and neglected due diligence of researching the facts we presented to them. Otherwise, why would they have come to the decision to continue fluoridating the public water supply? We have them on record stating that it does not have a benefit to the safety of the water that so many people in this town drink.

They are not open about their actions, nor are they forthcoming with information that should be public.   For example, I have asked them numerous times if they use sodium fluoride or a kind of fluorosilic acid, and they have not told me which one they use. I have asked them to address what gives them the right to give out a drug to unwitting people when they are admittedly not health professionals. They are the ones who add fluoride to the water and set the quantity of fluoride added. What are they doing adding fluoride to the water when they are not health professionals? They are not elected, but rather are an ad hoc committee. This goes against the constitution of North Carolina.

I am writing to implore you to re-examine the policies of the OWASA board.

Think about these things, and ask yourself these questions:

  1. The supposed purpose of the water fluoridation is supposedly for hardening the enamel of the teeth through the saliva. Fluoride has an NDC # (National Drug Code Number). Is it ethical to give a drug to everyone – or put otherwise – to discriminate against those who would not like to take the drug fluoride by forcing them to obtain fresh water sources and denying them public water?
  2. If I drink one liter of OWASA water, I would be taking the equivalent of .7 mg of fluoride. If I were to drink to two liters of OWASA water, that means I would get 1.4 mgs of fluoride. The NDC # is relevant to doses of only .25 mg. per day. Think about that. This is huge over exposure if you are just drinking a regular amount of water. The board is drugging the population.
  3. Could the right to freedom of religion be violated by the addition of a toxin to the water supply? Muslims must use clean water, free of toxins for their prayers. Fluoride is a toxin and health hazard.
  4. How can one ethically put a substance in the public water supply that has been linked to decreased bone density and lowered IQ in a Harvard Medical Journal study: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
  5. Has OWASA exceeded their charter in attempting to forcibly (covertly) drug the entire population? YES! OWASA’s charter allows them to provide clean water, not give drugs to the general population.
  6. Fluoride pacifies people and makes them more complacent. This characteristic was used by Hitler, Stalin, and numerous other dictators to pacify the population and coerce them more easily into going along with totalitarian, facist ideologies. Why would we risk this in our own society by fluoridating the public?
  7. WATER FLUORIDATION WAS JUST BANNED BY THE COUNTRY OF ISRAEL, STOPPED IN PORTLAND, OREGON AND IS GAINING MOMENTUM AS AN ISSUE OPPOSED BY AN AWAKENED PUBLIC.

The reality is that there a growing number of concerned citizens believe or at least question not only the validity of fluoride science, but the ethicality, potential of severely harmful side effects (on the human body through accumulation in the environment and over exposure), and true purpose of water fluoridation. We stand against water fluoridation whole-heartedly and believe fluoride should be avoided.

All Our Best,

PARKER EMMERSON AND THE UNDERSIGNED ATTACHED

X__________________________________

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqQkqZKBuV4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyMlwv1pBKk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrovKbkEyIs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rTevKbkBzs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ8qzDLZTZ8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRsWFghoPXM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYOllO4yM1o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFw5_9JdQ14

http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/9070

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluorosilicic_acid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium_fluoride

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFdwgpVCQQw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-0BhD6gebY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouNxYtCL32s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyMlwv1pBKk

Hi Steve,

I hope you’ve been well.

I am mailing you to find out if you would be willing to make a public comment on this recent article published by TIME magazine which cites Fluoride as being an industrial chemical that causes harm to the brain.

Children Exposed to More Brain-Harming Chemicals Than Ever Before (TIME magazine)

 “Now the same researchers have reviewed the literature and found six additional industrial chemicals that can hamper normal brain development. These are manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Manganese, they say, is found in drinking water and can contribute to lower math scores and heightened hyperactivity, while exposure to high levels of fluoride from drinking water can contribute to a seven-point drop in IQ on average. The remaining chemicals, which are found in solvents and pesticides, have been linked to deficits in social development and increased aggressive behaviors.”

I’d also like to take this opportunity to make you aware that I receive regular traffic to my website, as a result of people searching YOUR name, ostensibly to discover your feelings on this topic (see graphic below).  Whether the people searching your name are in alignment with your “convictions” or not, I’m not sure…but in any case I thought I would offer my website as a platform to get your “expert” analysis on this TIME magazine article & why you feel the general population should ignore all the warnings about drinking too much fluoride published by respected scientists at Harvard University.  I will gladly publish whatever you have to say on this subject since I know you are highly motivated to combat any “anti-fluoride” sentiments that show themselves on the internet.

slott

Sincerely yours,

Corey Sturmer

____________________________________________________

Corey, i have no specific comment for you to place on your little blog.  Actually, it’s of no concern to me what you post on it.  If you simply want to be educated on Grandjean’s statements, first, notice that there is no mention of concentration levels of fluoride, simply the implication that the mere presence of fluoride at any concentration will “hamper brain development”.  There is no substance known to man which is not toxic at improper levels, including plain water.  Fluoride is certainly no exception.  Concentration level is the difference between safety and toxicity of ANY substance we ingest. Water is fluoridated at the minuscule concentration of 0.7 ppm.  At this concentration it is not toxic.  If you care to dispute this elementary fact then provide valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support your claim.  Keep in mind that the antifluoridationist websites, and blogs on which you solely rely for your “information” do not qualify as valid sources.

As far as Choi and Grandjean’s Harvard Review on which Grandjean bases his “suggestions” about IQ and brain  development in regard to fluoridated water, this was actually a review of 27 Chinese studies found in obscure Chinese scientific journals, of the effects of high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in the well water of various Chinese, Mongolian, and Iranian village. The concentration of fluoride in these studies was as high as 11.5 ppm. By the admission of the Harvard researchers, these studies had key information missing, used questionable methodologies, and had inadequate controls for confounding factors. These studies were so seriously flawed that the lead researchers, Anna Choi, and Phillippe Grandjean, were led to issue the following statement in September of 2012:

“–These results do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S. On the other hand, neither can it be concluded that no risk is present. We therefore recommend further research to clarify what role fluoride exposure levels may play in possible adverse effects on brain development, so that future risk assessments can properly take into regard this possible hazard.”

–Anna Choi, research scientist in the Department of Environmental Health at HSPH, lead author, and Philippe Grandjean, adjunct professor of environmental health at HSPH, senior author

As it seems there have been no translations of these studies into English by any reliable, objective source, it is unclear as to whether they had even been peer-reviewed, a basic for credibility of any scientific study. These studies were flawed that NOTHING could be “concluded” from them.

Steve

Steven D. Slott, DDS

PO Box 1744

Burlington, NC.  27216

Sent from my iPad

____________________________________________________

Steve,

I have to be honest I really just wanted to be entertained by the psychological acrobatics I knew you would perform in order to justify the continued addition of an industrial chemical to our water supply.  Like always you delivered so thanks for the laughs!

However  I must admit it would be a lot funnier if it wasn’t so sad, how many people like yourself have to resort to picking a part each damning study which individually contribute to the gradual chipping away at the 60 year long PR stunt that is public water fluoridation.  I respect you more than most apologists because at least you put forth a lot of effort…But let’s be real – you are on the defense because the body of evidence which supports public water fluoridation is diminishing quickly & the body of evidence which supports its removal is growing all the time.  You & others of your ilk have had your time and I think you are acutely aware of this fact, as evidenced by all the frantic attacks you wage against those who speak out about this crime on the internet.

One would think,  given the self pronounced efficacy of this practice, that we would not be finding out about adverse health effects 60 years after the fact & instead the “scientific community” would have known ALL possible ramifications of ingesting fluoride when it was first forced on the American public in the 1950’s.  Of course, we know that the establishment did know many of the ramifications (and that they were negative), but this was ignored intentionally & those reasons are precisely why it was rammed down our throats in the first place.  NOT for the “dental health” of our nation but to actually impair the rational cognitive ability of the American people, which you epitomize by the way.

It is even more laughable, how focused you & other statists are on the “optimal concentration level” of fluoride in our water, when this so-called “optimal level” was so recently lowered due to the department of health & human services own admission, that over ingestion of fluoride is responsible for 40% of adolescents now suffering from some degree of fluorosis.    Statists always hide behind the auspices of having figured out the “exact optimal level” of fluoridation thanks to the “science,” except they never acknowledge that their “science” was originally flawed by their own admission.  Do you not see how discrediting it is to unilaterally change the “optimal level” without admitting that the prior “optimal” was too much?
Maybe that’s a mental trapeze act you just aren’t ready to perform yet.

Of course,  another thing I never hear you & other statists say, is whether you actually know the proper “dose” of fluoride.  I suspect this is because

  1.  There isn’t a proper dose to ingest orally since drinking fluoride is absolutely non-essential & has no material positive effect on any organ when ingested &
  2.  Talking about dosages & what medications one should ingest would be outside the scope of your licensure as a dentist & surely discredit you as a legitimate source of information on this topic…

But you have already discredited yourself countless times around the web & I thank you for providing one more example today.

Corey

____________________________________________________

Gee, Corey, it’s not like I haven’t seen all this ridiculous nonsense copied/pasted from  antifluoridationist websites, countless times.  Your total lack of success in furthering your irrational vendetta against fluoridation, in spite of your repeated “presentations” to intelligent people,  is all that needs to be viewed in regard to your claims.  Why don’t you surprise everyone and actually come up with something intelligent, instead of just parroting Connett’s  nonsense from “fluoridealert.org“?

Steve

Steven D. Slott, DDS

PO Box 1744

Burlington, NC.  27216

Sent from my iPad

____________________________________________________

Steve,

Without giving any credence to your opinion of what is “intelligent” or not, since it has been made abundantly clear that you are no authority whatsoever on original thought, I humbly submit my latest video which will teach you more about water in 10 minutes than you ever learned in the fluorescent lit halls of academia which seem to have forever savaged your feeble mind.

Corey

____________________________________________________

Thanks, Corey, but I prefer to obtain my information from credible, reliable, and authoritative sources of peer- reviewed scientific literature…..not from “YouTube” videos and antifluoridationist websites.

Steve

Steven D. Slott, DDS

PO Box 1744

Burlington, NC.  27216

Sent from my iPad

Join the Facebook Event Here

The Durham City Government has just announced that they will be officially receiving the recommendation from the Durham Public Health Board to continue drugging our municipal water supply this coming Thursday on September 5, 2013. Terry Capers from the City Clerk’s office recently wrote,

To: thegldnrule@gmail.com

from: Terry.Capers@durhamnc.gov

The Durham County Public Health Director Ms. Gayle Harris will present the Mayor and City Council with the Municipal Water Fluoridation recommendation at the Work Session on Thursday, September 5, 2013 at 1:00 pm!

If you are interested in speaking at the Work Session regarding the item please let me know and I will inform the City Clerk’s Office of your presence. 

On Friday afternoon, August 30th the September 5th Work Session agenda will be posted to our website for your convenience.

Questions please let us know.

Enjoy your Thursday! 

Since we have now become experts at seeing through the tired & repetitive public health propaganda, we can accurately predict what we will hear from Gayle Harris on September 5th, 2013 and react accordingly.  It should be no surprise to anyone that Gayle Harris will say something similar if not exactly the same as was uttered by Vicki Westbrook all the way back in 2011, when I first brought this issue to the Council’s attention.

In fact, the audio recordings of Vicki are below where she said something remarkably similar to the official recommendation produced by the board of health back in June of this year, nearly 2 years later;

“Fluoridation in drinking water is again considered to be one of the primary resources for preventing tooth decay and one of the top 10 advances in Public Health that has happened since the 1900’s”

-Vicki Westbrook

Compare & Contrast Vicki’s statement from 2011 with the recommendation published in June by the board of health, after so much “diligent consideration” by the board of health & Durham City Government, which Gayle Harris will repeat to the city council on this coming Thursday:

Durham Board of Health News: “Board of Health Recommends Continued Fluoridation of Drinking Water”

“This recommendation is deemed effective for prevention of tooth decay and for promotion of good oral health by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (US-DHHS) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

If my prediction comes true, this would certainly re-confirm the pattern we have noticed since the beginning of our efforts which is to repeat the propaganda perpetrated by the U.S. Public Health Service, where the Fluoridation policy originated in the first place during the 1950’s.

You see, even after the Fluoride fraud was brilliantly exposed in 2012 by WTVD in addition to a collective 2 years protesting publicly, the sad fact is that the prognosis from the whole Durham City Government remains every bit as un-evolved as it was to begin with:

“The Government will continue to medicate the population through the water supply, without providing any scientific evidence of its benefits.”

Have they not learned anything throughout all this time?  Do the people in our city government have no critical thinking skills of their own, or will they continue to restate the federal agency’s every word like they are dog on a choker leash?

While they have surely put on a nice theater which I will elaborate on below but first we ask ourselves;

  • Is it true that the board of health is making a legitimate & well researched recommendation?
  • Have they honestly debated the subject & considered all the developments since I brought this to their attention in 2011?

Let’s review the chronology of events and judge for ourselves:

  1. December 20, 2011 I presented scientific evidence to Durham City Council that fluoride was harmful to our bones & lowers the Intelligence Quotient in Children among other things & demanded it be stopped.  Vicki Westbrook appeared preemptively to say what was quoted above.
  2. December 25, 2011 The Herald Sun & Durham City Government Dismiss the whole thing
  3. January 2012 – I create DurhamAgainstFluoride.com
  4. January 2012 Los Angeles Healthcare System releases Study Linking Fluoride Uptake with #1 Killer Cardiovascular Disease
  5. March 22, 2012 I make a formal request for the documents which substantiate the city’s claim that drinking fluoride prevents tooth decay.  This is when Kevin Buchholtz from the Dept. of Health and Human Services appears and admits to the City Council that fluoride leaches lead from the pipe system and causes behavior problems in children, in addition to giving his own daughter dental fluorosis
  6. May 22, 2012 – Albuquerque, the most populated city in New Mexico Bans Public Water Fluoridation
  7. July 25, 2012 Harvard Releases Comprehensive Study Concluding Ingesting Fluoride Lowers Intelligence Quotient
  8. September 21, 2012 I Appear at Durham Public Health Board to encourage the board to do their own research and be proud about bucking the system; they create another ad-hoc committee to review Fluoride Issue
  9. November 15, 2012 WTVD releases their incredible 7.5 minute investigative report on Fluoride, featuring Durham Against Fluoride & the Board of Health
  10. November 29, 2012 Durham City Government Releases Rebuttal Video of Vicki Westbrook repeating unsubstantiated claim; “Fluoride is added to prevent tooth decay”
  11. December 2012 Durham City Government Posts Job Listing for Public Relations Manager for the Water Management Division
  12. January-February 2013 I began working with anti-Fluoride activists from Raleigh, Durham & Chapel Hill to produce a 1.5 hour long retrospective documentary on our efforts so far
  13. March 2013 Durham Public Health Board Finally Has their Hearing to debate the Fluoride issue and make their official recommendation; I am removed by force by a Deputy Sheriff who followed orders from Gayle Harris
  14. April 2013 the Documentary, entitled “21st Century Dawes Project” is published exposing the Triangle Public Health Bureaucracy which enforces water Fluoridation in Raleigh, Durham & Chapel Hill
  15. May 22, 2013 Portland Oregon votes “NO” to adding Fluoride
  16. July 25, 2013 Mayor Bill Bell asserts King-like Powers over Durham, stifles Anti-Fluoride Protests
  17. July 29, 2013 Israel joins most of the developed world & Bans Fluoride
  18. THIS Thursday September 5 2013 Gayle Harris will repeat the same script from the Department of Health and Human Services; We the People will repeal their recommendation because the city has still not produced any scientific evidence to substantiate their claim drinking fluoride chemicals will prevent tooth decay.

As was explained in my last post, the bureaucracy of Durham’s Government has kept the fluoride topic a real hot potato for 2 years now, passing it from one ad-hoc committee to another so as to provide the illusion that they are taking this issue seriously, but never producing any legitimate evidence to substantiate their claims.  How they can possibly still think that we are still buying this tactic any longer can only be understood by coming on Thursday to observe if my prediction about what Gayle Harris will say comes true.

Since no tangible evidence has been produced so far to substantiate their claims, and I assure you they will not be produced on Thursday, the original request which the City is trying to answer with this recommendation remains unanswered, no matter what Gayle Harris or anyone else says.  This is because the evidence which supports drinking fluoride as a means to prevent tooth decay does not exist, yet remains the basis of the continuation of the policy.

Even more troublesome is the fact that the government agent providing Thursday’s recommendation to the City Council also happens to be the individual who ordered a Sheriff to remove me from the *Public* hearing when I exposed the original fraud back in March of this year.  Talk about conflict of interest! Thanks to the wonders of youtube, we can instantly time travel to that moment when Gayle squeals “Sheriff!” as I debunk their fraud in real time:

Given all of the above, we the people will come to 101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC on Thursday September 5th and appeal this recommendation, restating these truths which we believe to be self evident: that medicating the city’s water supply with a corrosive waste product from the fertilizer manufacturers is an unethical, poisonous, and illegal thing to do!

Join the Facebook Event Here

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: Association of vascular fluoride uptake with vascular calcification and Coronary Artery Disease

A January 2012 study published by the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System has linked Sodium Fluoride uptake with the hardening & calcification of major arteries, also known as Cardiovascular disease & the number one cause of death in the United States.

The study first appeared in the Nuclear Medicine Communications Journal, a “rapid communications journal publishing research and clinical work in all areas of nuclear medicine for an international readership,”  but these observations have not yet been picked up by the collective.  The research was performed by nuclear medicine physicians who retrospectively reviewed the imaging data and cardiovascular history of 61 patients who received whole-body sodium [F]fluoride PET/CT studies at their institution from 2009 to 2010. Fluoride uptake and calcification in major arteries, including coronary arteries, were analyzed by both visual assessment and standardized uptake value measurement.

In the introduction section it is interestingly noted that the phenomenon of hardening arteries & what risks that may pose to our health has been extensively studied, however Fluoride uptake & it’s clinical significance to coronary arteries has not yet been documented:

To predict and prevent any deadly cardiovascular events, extensive studies have been conducted to evaluate the risk of cardiovascular disease.  Over the past decade, many cardiovascular studies focused on the calcification process in atherosclerosis (hardening of arteries).  Calcification in atherosclerosis occurs through an active process that resembles bone formation and is controlled by complex enzymatic and cellular pathways.  Coronary artery calcification parallels atherosclerosis progress and is strongly and linearly correlated with fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in coronary arteries.  However, the clinical significance of fluoride uptake in coronoary arteries has not been documented.

The results of this study therefore have vast implications for our collectively becoming aware of one main contributing factor to the ongoing scourge heart disease, namely municipal water fluoridation.  This is especially true in consideration that 80% of Americans are since 1957 forcibly fluoridated  via their public drinking water & cardiovascular disease still remains the #1 cause of death in America (600,000/year).

Despite this study’s relative significance to the research produced by Harvard which concluded higher Fluoride uptake predictably lowers the Intelligence Quotient in humans, these specific conclusions have unfortunately not made it into mainstream news to the same degree. Although the full article admits more research should be conducted on the clinical significance of Fluoride uptake, this is the exact problem we face (lack of studies) nearly 60 years into the forced, highly systematic & ubiquitous fluoridation of our municipal water supplies!  One wonders the true extent of damage done if our scientists are only just now realizing the tragic link between Fluoride uptake & a disease that kills more Americans than one hundred and seventy  9/11s combined EACH YEAR

This blows a huge hole in the already horrendously flawed pro-fluoride argument which posits that drinking Fluoride only affects the teeth and does not have any health hazards to other organs of the body.  For fluoride fighters in the area, listen to me debunk local Public Health Terrorist Rebecca King once more, who ridiculously claims ingestion of fluoride is the best thing since sliced bread as it returns to the mouth in our saliva & continuously bathes our teeth in Fluoride-rich fluid! Such a bold faced & twisted manipulation of the facts is incredible in that it intrinsically admits Fluoride is penetrating all cells of the body- even the salivation glands.

So What were the results?

Patients

There were 58 male patients and three female patients. Detailed clinical histories and the presence of cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, smoking history, obesity, and history of cardiovascular events, were obtained for all patients. The clinical characteristics of the patients are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 Patients' Clinical CharacteristicsImaging and Statistical Analyses

sd_CTorthopedics_main_enCT and PET images were coregistered by the Philips Extended Brilliance workstation (Philips Healthcare). CT, PET, and fused PET/CT images were evaluated visually and semi-quantitatively simultaneously using the same workstation. All images were analyzed by two independent nuclear medicine physicians blinded to all patients’ clinical information. Inter-reader reproducibility was excellent and was evaluated using an intraclass correlation coefficient (0.89). Vascular calcification was identified as positive on CT images if the target was visually detectable with a greater than 130 Hounsfield units. CT-attenuated PET images were evaluated for fluoride uptake in major arteries. Background activity was based on the standardized uptake value (SUV) of the blood pool, which was calculated from the mean SUVs of three circular regions of interest (ROIs) placed in the left atrium, mid lumen of the aortic arch, and abdominal aorta at the level of the celiac trunk on axial images. The sizes of ROIs were 2cm in diameter for the left atrium and 1cm for the aortic arch and the abdominal aorta.

Results (Abbreviated, click link to view original article)

Patients’ age and reasons for sodium fluoride PET/CT imaging are summarized in Table 1.  Most patients were men with a median age of 66 years (27-91 years).  The majority of patients (69%) had more than one risk factor for coronary artery disease.

Arterial sodium Fluoride uptake and calcification

Arterial wall sodium fluoride uptake and calcification were evaluated in major arteries, including carotid arteries, the thoracic ascending (including aortic arch) aorta, the thoracic descending aorta, the abdominal aorta, femoral arteries, and major branches of coronary arteries. Iliac arteries were not evaluated because of frequently observed urinary and occasional bowel uptake in the pelvis, which interferes with the accurate assessment of iliac vessels. For coronary arteries, four major branches were evaluated. An example of fluoride uptake in femoral arteries is shown in Fig. 1. Orthogonal views of fluoride uptake in the aorta and coronary arteries are shown in Figs 2 and 3.
Figure1
Figure 2Figure3Relationship between coronary fluoride uptake and cardiovascular risk factors
The coronary arteries were also investigated for fluoride uptake. Four major branches of coronary arteries, including left main artery (LMA), left anterior descending (LAD), left circumflex (LCA), and right coronary arteriy (RCA) were evaluated. Fluoride uptake was more frequently observed in the LAD and LCAs.  A similar pattern was also identified in coronary artery calcification. In each individual coronary branch, calcification was more frequently observed than fluoride uptake (Table 2).  Table2
  • Among 10 patients who had significant three-vessel coronary calcifications, 80% demonstrated fluoride uptake in at least one coronary branch (data not shown).
  • Cardiovascular risk factors including hypertension, obesity, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, smoking history, and history of coronary artery disease were reviewed in all patients (Table 3).
  • The majority of the patients (69%) had more than one cardiovascular risk factor; however, neither the individual cardiovascular risk factor nor the number of risk factors was significantly correlated with coronary fluoride uptake (Table 3).
Table3
Nine patients had a history of cardiovascular events. Among them, eight demonstrated identifiable coronary fluoride uptake. There was significant correlation between coronary calcification and fluoride uptake in this group evaluated by Fisher’s exact test (Table 3). All nine patients also demonstrated coronary calcification on CT images. We also compared the SUVmax in coronary arteries between patients with and without a history of cardiovascular events. The average coronary SUV max in patients with a history of cardiovascular events was 1.70, significantly higher than 1.39 for patients without a history of cardiovascular events (P=0.029, two-tailed Student’s t-test). No correlation was observed between cardiovascular risk factors and fluoride uptake in other vascular territories (noncoronary).

Discussion Highlights

Vascular calcification, in particular coronary calcification, has been shown to predict vascular events [25–27]. 

In our study, fluoride uptake and CT calcification are significantly correlated in the same arterial territories, except in the abdominal aorta. This is because of the extremely high positive rate (97%, only one patient demonstrated negative uptake) for fluoride uptake in the abdominal aorta.

 Fluoride uptake either overlaps with calcification or locates adjacent to the detectable calcium deposits, suggesting that fluoride uptake and detectable calcification represent different stages of the atherosclerotic process.

 We found that fluoride uptake in coronary arteries is significantly correlated with a patient’s history of cardiovascular events, and the uptake value in patients with cardiovascular events was significantly higher than that in patients without cardiovascular events. These results further support the fact that higher fluoride uptake in coronary arteries indicates increased cardiovascular risk.

The combination of sodium [18F]fluoride PET and CT is a promising imaging modality that provides both metabolic and anatomic information in evaluating vascular calcification. However, large-scale studies are needed to evaluate the clinical significance of fluoride PET/CT for imaging atherosclerosis.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates that vascular calcification and fluoride uptake are significantly correlated in the same arterial territory, although not necessarily overlapping in the same anatomic locations. An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. Combined anatomic and metabolic imaging with sodium [18F]fluoride PET/CT offers a promising, noninvasive method to evaluate atherosclerosis.

Introduction

To understand in a comprehensive manner what transpired in the video above one has to first fully understand the background and context of my effort as an individual to end the practice of fluoridating our public water supplies in Durham, North Carolina.

If you have been following this blog you may already be aware of my journeys as a turd through the bowels of Durham’s city government so if you want to skip to the culminating event, Click Here.

In order to put the culminating event in the proper context what follows is a chronologically succinct account of my efforts which all lead up to the rather climactic events from this past Thursday evening.

My Awakening

In December 2011 I was getting dental work done on my back molars when I was inspired to ask the question,

“Is there Fluoride in the drinking water?” 

The dentist replied,

“Yes of course!”

I had always heard fluoride was in the drinking water but never quite understood how drinking it would do any good for just my teeth but not affect other parts of my body – so I asked

“Why is it in the drinking water again?”

The simple yet oft repeated response came without surprise,

“It’s good for your dental enamel.”

The problem with this statement is that it is never accompanied by anything more than anecdotal evidence and in my case, the anecdotal evidence was not so supportive of drinking fluoride.  You see, I was diagnosed early on with having a defect known as “Dental Fluorosis” which is the literal degradation and deterioration of dental enamel.

This condition is partly responsible for my needing such dramatic dental work done in the first place but more than anything is indicative of fluoride overexposure from the inside out.  This means every other organ in my body is also overexposed which bothers me greatly.

Naturally, such a contradiction of circumstances caused me to question the official rhetoric on this topic and lead me to do a great deal of research which is where the real story begins…

IMG_9588

Click for Larger View – These are my teeth which are consistent with the scientific literature on patients suffering from dental Fluorosis.

My Dental Xrays which Show Fluorosis and rampant dental decay

My Dental Xrays which Show Fluorosis and dental decay

My First Appearance

What I uncovered in my research was so startling I began to wonder who I should tell.  At first I was simply alarmed at the idea that something in our drinking water would be so dangerous, but at the time was not mentally prepared for the bureaucracy and cognitive dissonance I would later experience when trying to bring this information to everyone’s attention.

In an almost automated emotional reaction to the research I uncovered about public water fluoridation, I appeared for the first time before the Durham City Council on December 20th, 2011.  With little forethought I showed up to bluntly present the damning evidence that Fluoride has been shown to reduce IQ, cause skeletal fragility and bone density issues, as well as cause the condition I suffer from – Fluorosis.

The response to my petition came promptly from Mayor Bill Bell which will not surprise anyone who has any experience with corporate government,

Obviously, the suggestion [to remove fluoride] would be a dramatic change from the way we presently operate, I’m sure the manager and his staff will take it under advisement and come back with a recommendation.”

The “manager and his staff” eventually did take it under advisement and came back with the following recommendation:

Durham's responseIn response to my statement on December 25, 2011 the following article was published by Ray Gronberg and the local Herald Sun newspaper which broadly dismissed my miniscule effort to raise awareness.  The publication of this article only thickened the plot however because in it certain governmental authorities were prompted to respond to my allegations.  Their response which inherently must be deceptive became motivation for me to continue exposing their lies.  Kevin Buchholtz, a NC Dept. of Health and Human Services stooge who later plays a role in this saga replied to my petition by saying,

From the State’s perspective trying to respond to every allegation regarding fluoride is challenging and counterproductive.”

My Next Move

Having been totally dissatisfied with the City’s response to my petition, I decided to make things a lot more challenging from the ‘state’s perspective’ and created this website in January 2012.  Since then DurhamAgainstFluoride.com has served as a media platform to document my effort and spread the word locally and abroad.

The initial publication about my December appearance at city council combined with the creation of this website was enough to grab the attention of some other fluoride activists who reached out and began coaching me on how to be more effective with my efforts.  One such activist was Jeff Green, National Director for Citizens for Safe Drinking water who taught me how to tangle with the government on their terms.  The result of my discussions with him manifested in My Next Move, which was a formal request for documentation made on March 22, 2012.

According to the strategy the best way to expose the lack of scientific evidence which supports community water fluoridation is to ask for it!  Jeff emphasized that since the evidence is on our side, asking for toxicological studies and other documentation will put The Powers That Be on defense, shifting the burden of proof to the city who then must convince us that fluoridation is such a critical public health benefit.  The reasoning was that if no documentation existed, the inability to produce it would cause even the most ignorant in government to begin asking questions internally.

So in January-February 2012 I began making phone calls to the water management department in order to procure the documents I knew did not exist.  What transpired was a series of dead ends which eventually produced the following, stunning information:

  1. The City of Durham purchases Hydrofluorosilicic acid from Pencco, a chemicals supplier who re-sells wholesale toxic waste from
  2. MOSAIC, a division of POTASH corporation who sells the leftover wasteproducts from fertilizer/phosphate production to the City of Durham who
  3. Systematically bleeds the cocktail of pollutants @ .7 parts per/million into our drinking water as a way of disposing the waste

Even more stunning still was the only formal document ever tendered by the water authority which testifies to the safety of Hydrofluorosilicic Acid.  This chemical, which has a HAZMAT rating of 8 Corrosive, is admitted in the city’s OWN literature to cause fluorosis and bone density issues as well as having 0 toxicological studies:

Dissatisfied with this as evidence of fluoride’s crucial public health benefit, I appeared on March 22, 2012 to make the city council aware of this absence of information and to formally request they produce the necessary toxicological documentation to the citizens.  What happened next immediately told me that I was up against forces with far more motivation to continue this policy than I had ever originally anticipated.

In a premeditated nature The Powers That Be deployed NC Department of Health and Human Services goon Kevin Bucholtz who is the West Region Supervisor for the Oral Health Division.  He appeared subsequent my formal request for information to rebut a position I did not even argue.  I gotta hand it to Kevin – he really impressed me with such a whirlwind of hypocritical dribble.  The most amazing thing is that he came with prepared statements and yet, for 4+ minutes, Kevin rambles on about how the NC Department of Health does not agree with the conclusion drawn by millions of citizens around the world that drinking fluoride is of no public benefit.  In the next breath Kevin bluntly admits that hydrofluorosilicic acid can leech lead from the plumbing system and is directly responsible for his own daughter suffering from Fluorosis. 

Just so we’re clear:

  1. I attend city council to ask for toxicology studies on fluoride
  2. The state sends their best rep – Kevin – who says in one breath Fluoride is a poison
  3. And in the next, it’s good for you and he’s proud of it

How do you argue with that?

This has to be heard to be believed:

Note: This same appearance was later cited on the Durham Water Management Website in Direct Response to my request for information:

As seen on DurhamNC.gov:

DurhamSite

Connecting the Dots

After witnessing first hand the inaction of Durham’s City government I began to firmly understand how crippled the humble minds of our “authorities” really were on this subject and all faith in their willingness to reasonably address this issue was lost.

Since The Powers That Be had acted in such a preemptive and precise manner, I was able to discern intuitively that I should simply try in whatever way possible to raise awareness on this issue and to ignore for a little while the illusion that my appearances at city council affected any great change.  So I began exploring other avenues and became more committed to educating by any means necessary.

I began to realize at this point that this is a war of consciousness, spanning time and dimensions so I relied increasingly on pure inspiration and intuition to fuel this effort.  I felt increasingly that the effort was past-time fun which lead me to take great joy in the further development of this website, printing flyers, meditating, lucid dreaming and speaking about Fluoride whenever appropriate in conversation.  These tiny efforts approached as just a part of regular every day life over time are what I credit with sowing the seeds of later success.

On July 12, 2012 I published this report which cites a 1991 study done in Durham where scientists and the water authority collaborated to study the effects of ending water fluoridation.  One of the central pillars holding up the Pro-Fluoridationist argument is the fear tactic that if we stop fluoridating, we will see an explosion in dental cavities.  The conclusion of the Durham study makes it an incredibly significant one in that it supports the debunking of this very claim.

Later in this report you will hear a precise example of this from our civil servants who state that children will miss more school if we turn fluoride off, due to the rise in dentist visits from the ensuing tooth decay!

It’s this same crazed fear-tactic which has kept fluoridation ongoing for so long and therefore makes the discovery of this study and it’s implications so worth mentioning in isolation.

The most ironic thing is that I was a likely participant of this study, since it was conducted in Durham during my elementary years with children from the public school I attended.  Although any evidence is surely lost in time, it is a distinct possibility which I had to consider and therefore motivated me to send my report to hundreds of government/media/academic professionals in the area.

The study itself measured the incisors of over 1800 gradeschool children in Durham and over the course of an 11 month period, the study concluded no rise in Cavities but a decrease in the level of Fluorosis among participants.  For convenience I have posted the video from that report below:

Durham guinea pig reports; Duke University study links city water fluoridation with dental damage

During my research I discovered that the Durham City Council takes their policy directives on public health issues from a separate committee – the Durham County Public Health Board.  This meant I had attended the “wrong” body of our government originally which at the time seemed to explain my lack of success.  Of course, the government will never point you in the right direction so it only took some months and a lot of personal time to uncover this.  This phenomenon where council after committee after working group relegate authority to each other is the leitmotif of our government which is constructed like the layers of an onion for the express purpose that you will hopefully go away.

Nevertheless I was informed that the Public Health Board is instrumental in changing Durham’s fluoridation policy since the city council would vote largely based on the recommendations from this board, who is composed of citizen “experts” from different disciplines. From this point on I made it my goal to educate the Durham Public Health Board, and hopefully get through to enough people to at least bring it to a citizen vote.

During this same time I contacted and began working closely with Steve Daniels & ABC news affiliate WTVD Channel 11, who followed me for a few months while they were producing an investigative report on community water fluoridation.

After some conversations with WTVD it was decided that my next formal step was to appear before the Durham Public Health Board and present the same information I had previously brought to the City Council’s attention.

On September 13th I made my first official appeal to the Durham County Health board after my initial report:

Thanks to my appearance on September 13 and the presence of local media, the Public Health Board began a formal inquiry into the subject and agreed to look further into the evidence.  Despite my reservations that this was just another hoop to jump through, I was quick to accept this as a partial victory since at least the subject was being discussed.  When you accept this is a battle for awareness discussion no matter how contrived can only be measured as success.

Jump Point

Then, on November 15, 2012 Durham Against Fluoride had it’s first major breakthrough thanks to the completion of WTVD’s 7.5 minute investigative report:

The reaction was overwhelming for me as well as the WTVD crew.  I watched Steve Daniel’s facebook receive thousands of likes, hundreds of comments and I was told personally by the Senior Producer that they had never in her time at WTVD experienced such a passionate response to a story they aired.  Anchorman Steve Daniels likewise sent me the following e-mail which pointed to a total success:

Corey –

I have been overwhelmed by the response to the story.

You get all the credit for getting the ball rolling on our end.  I appreciate your persistence in pushing us toward revisiting the issue.

We are working on another angle for February.

Let’s stay in touch about your efforts.

-Steve

In response to this negative media attention, the Water Management Department immediately created a job posting for a “Senior Public Affairs Specialist” who would be paid more than $65,000/year to actively combat my efforts to expose these basic truths about public water fluoridation.

Is Durham Water Management Division Preparing Pro-Fluoride Propaganda?

With the help of WTVD’s report I was immediately put in touch with fluoride activists from around the world.  More importantly I was able to network with local activists who also have a passion for this issue.  Thus began my cooperation and more formal collaboration with individuals from Wake County & Chapel Hill, resulting in the following reports and the creation of RaleighAgainstFluoride.com:

Building on the momentum almost one month after the publication of WTVD’s report, I appeared again at the Durham Public Health Board to encourage them to stand on the side of social justice in unison against community water fluoridation.  This was moments before they adjourned to have a closed-door meeting where they finalized the board’s next steps to address the citizen concerns on public water fluoridation.

Durham County Health Board: “We are reviewing the evidence”

The Hearing


On March 14, 2013 Approximately 16 months after my initial appearance at the Durham City Council I found myself before the Durham County Public Health Board a third time in what can only be described as the culminating event.  It is my sincere belief that this will serve as a secondary jump point for this effort towards a new, expanded level of awareness for the general public.

Due to the preceding 16 months of work exposing the fluoride deception in my area I was able to force the county health board to formally acknowledge and review this subject which they begrudgingly did in a contrived & organized fashion to simply perpetuate the status quo.

Keeping with the leitmotif of all corporate governments, the Durham county health board relegated their own logical/rational thinking capabilities to another committee of people in the form of an “expert panel.”

To my total lack of surprise, I found that the panel was cherry picked by the City to achieve a self-described “balanced” perspective on this issue.  In other words, the 5-person panel were with only one exception uniformly government-paid employees offering only their personal opinion and not any scientific facts whatsoever.  Later In this report you may even hear Department of Health Dental Chief Rebecca King actually cite one of her credentials as having been “a supporter of fluoridation.” Can that be put on a resume?

Before the proceedings began I was given 3 minutes to speak and unfortunately was not able to capture video of this.  I was unprepared to speak since the health board would not return my phone calls to find out who would be participating on the “expert panel,” so I simply responded in a reactionary way when my time came.

The following is a basic recall of what I stated to the board & the panel who was present:

Hi everyone, my name is Corey Sturmer. For those of you who don’t know me I have been speaking about public water fluoridation here in Durham for a little more than a year now.  During that year I have learned a lot about how government works and I hope to continue that today, as I understand we are having a hearing on this important subject known as community water fluoridation.
So to help make this a successful hearing I would like to urge you the board to ask the expert panel the most appropriate questions possible.  So I will just go down the list –

08e46dc

Vicki Westbrook
vicki.westbrook@durhamnc.gov

Vicki Westbrook – She is the assistant director of the water management department.  You should ask her WHERE the water department purchases the fluoride that is added to our water.  If she is honest she will have to tell you that Williams Water Treatment Plant buys hydrofluorosilic acid from a fertilizer manufacturer named MOSAIC.  Hydrofluorosilicic acid is the byproduct of phosphate manufacturing and the city helps them dispose of it by bleeding it into our water.

So this is an important thing to ask Vicki and I am sure she will tell you this.

Timothy Wright
tim_wright@dentistry.unc.edu

Then we have Mr. Tim Wright & Rebecca King who are licensed Dentists.  When you are asking them questions be sure to ask if it is in their professional opinion because as a licensed dentist he is not permitted to answer questions about INGESTING fluoride – otherwise he would need to be an internal medicine doctor.  Anything else is just his personal opinion and remember, it is not JUST about the teeth since we are drinking the chemical and therefore exposing all of our cells to the effects of it.

I also see on the agenda several public health officials, and I know that the tendency of all city governments is to follow guidance from the public health department.  I think it’s important to remember that as much as they may mean well, it is not up to the public health department to decide what goes in our water – that is a decision for ALL of us – You, me and the rest of the citizens.  Do not be intimidated by the public health department either because there are dozens and dozens of examples where cities have ignored their state health department to cease fluoridation.

So if one thing could come out of this meeting it should be that we put this to a vote – and let the CITIZENS decide what goes into the public drinking water.  It is all of our decision, as health board members, public health officials or citizens living in durham – so we should let the citizens debate the facts and give them the chance to make an informed decision.  Thank you.

Setting the Stage for The Big Lie

In order to effectively brainwash the public health board, The Powers That Be carefully selected 5 individuals (4 present) who collectively paint a broad and deceptive enough brush stroke over the subject of water fluoridation so as to tranquilize any inquisitive mind that may see through their ragged arguments.

As if my 3 minute public comment did not ever happen, the chair of the Public Health Board James Miller can be heard below stating that “Anyone who interrupts will be forced to leave” with The Sheriff Deputy waiting patiently in the corner, clearly requested prior to the meeting in case the known antagonist (myself) were to make any public demonstrations of their deception.

This was an obvious way for the city to keep the panel’s opinion sterile, only to be taken in isolation of all external factors – like factual information from me.

As if insulated from the glaring truths of this issue, the self-concocted pro fluoride cheer-squad began their dreadful & irrelevant rambling on the efficacy of public water fluoridation.  Using tired old scripts from the Center for Disease Control, Public Health Department, and American Dental Association which have long been debunked on this site and others, these so-called “experts” offered nothing more than anecdotal evidence and circumlocution of the real core issues to do with the illegal medication of our public water supply.

Vicki Westbrook

vicki.westbrook@durhamnc.gov

First up was Vicki Westbrook who was mentioned previously in my speech and is one of the first persons I confronted on this journey.  She offered a mostly inert presentation essentially reiterating the very basic facts of what the Water Management Department does.

The Water Management Department is simply complicit with whatever the City Council says, who further take their mandates from other bureaucratic institutions like the Department of Public Health and the City’s own health board.  As such, Vicki’s position is more administrative than anything so I would not ever expect her to rock the boat.   I did find it interesting however when she states that the City of Durham began fluoridating due to a “Postcard vote in 1957,” which should give everyone pause.

Amy Keyworth

Next was Amy Keyworth who seems like a bright person but was obviously recruited for dubious reasons beyond her narrow perspective.  Amy is a hydrogeologist for the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which means she is an expert on the groundwater of North Carolina.  As you can see in the video she presents some comprehensive data on natural fluoride concentration levels in North Carolina’s ground water, but does not draw any conclusions herself.   Her data taken as a solitary perspective is presented to the board without any elucidation as to how this relates to the issue I am raising – namely – the medication of our public drinking water with hydrofluorosilicic acid!  This should demonstrate either the corruption of the board or complete ignorance of those who picked the panel since groundwater has absolutely nothing to do with the mandated distribution of purchased chemicals.

The reason her presentation was totally irrelevant is exposed later in the hearing right before I am escorted out of the building by the sheriff.  The key point which my higher self forced me to explain is that it is NOT naturally occurring fluoride that is added to our water supply and therefore groundwater has nothing to do with this issue.

Amazingly this is not even HIDDEN on the Water Management Website yet it was obscured in the very hearing which I worked more than 1 year to produce!

As seen on DurhamNC.gov

DurhamSite2

Rebecca King

(919) 707-5480
Rebecca.King@dhhs.nc.gov

Rebecca King is a Dental Advisor for the NC Department of Health and Human Services (Oral Health Division).  If you remember from earlier in this saga it was her colleague Kevin Buchholtz from the same division who originally attempted to rebut me during my March 22, 2012 appearance.  I wonder if Kevin was not available for this hearing or he was somewhat intimidated by the e-mail I sent him before my first appearance at the Durham Public Health meeting.  The following e-mail went unanswered and I never saw Kevin again, not even once:

To: Kevin.Buchholtz@dhhs.nc.gov

Date: Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:39 AM

Subject: We Are Coming For You.

Kevin,

Your duplicitous endorsement of Fluoride is going to get you in trouble someday.

I hope to see you again soon,

https://durhamagainstfluoride.com/2012/09/13/special-event-thursday-september-13-at-durham-county-health-building/

Sincerely,

Corey

To Rebecca’s credit she may have one-uped Kevin with her defense of fluoridation so will be hearing from me likewise very soon.  I must admit this was a tall order when it was Kevin Buchholtz who, in his own argument, made a tacit admission that FSA leeches lead from pipe systems and gave his own daughter fluorosis.

Rebecca King’s defense of fluoridation will no doubt be one for the books:

“We drink fluoridated water and the trace levels of fluoride return to the mouth in the saliva where it provides topical protection  as teeth are continuously bathed by fluoride-rich saliva.”

Tim Wright

919-537-3955
wrightt@DENTISTRY.UNC.EDU

In a wide-ranging 7.5 minute stream of complete bullshit, local pediatric dentist Tim Wright makes short work debunking hundreds of scientific studies without providing a solitary shred of evidence other than his own highly fluoridated opinion.   His three main factors, “Safety, Effectiveness, & Cost” blatantly ignore the self evident ethical and legal problems with mass medication of the population which I point out in this article pursuant existing Federal Drug Administration Laws.  As I expected Tim Wright did not offer his professional opinion, only his personal one, since he is licensed as a dentist and not qualified to answer questions about how drinking Hydrofluorosilicic Acid affects the human body.

I expected very little from Timothy the moment I recognized him on the panel.

First – I always take offense when someone as FAT as Tim Wright lectures me about why I should be forced to drink fluoride when he is clearly so reckless with his own body.

Secondly – It immediately occurred to me that he was the one lone doofus defending fluoride in my WTVD report! 

According to my sources most people turned down the opportunity to appear on TV in support of Fluoride but Tim Wright volunteered himself.  This leads me to believe he is either monetarily invested in the perpetuation of fluoridation or he has constructed such an identity with fluoride through his misguided academic work that he is willing to defend it in a public forum rather than admit the bitter truth.

Before the meeting began I heard Tim Wright whisper to a colleague, “Are you ready to do battle?” as if he is on some kind of team.   Timothy – if you really want to do battle and seem to be so wrapped up in pushing fluoride then you should debate me in a public forum on Water Fluoridation.   I don’t even need the pretense of being a dentist in order to deconstruct your silly arguments.

Using sweeping generalizations and vague dictums Tim Wright in a most blanket manner discredits ALLscientific criticisms of fluoride ingestion but later admits that “we know fluoride is hazardous in high levels.”

Well Tim, if this fact is known even by the expert panel chosen to defend fluoridation then it is no surprise that the science of DOSAGE is completely lost on your humble mind.

When considering Fluoridation as a preventative medicine via ingestion the key factor which is incredibly lost on these dense people is not whether Fluoride is equitably delivered to the water…The most important factor is the equitable distribution to our human bodies!!

In decades of academic study has it never occurred to this imbecile that we all will naturally drink more or less water than one another?

These most basic facts are either totally lost on Timothy Wright or he is so blinded by his academic brainwashing that he refuses to see how outdated and discredited his perspective has become.  Sooner or later the bitter reality will catch up to Dr. Wright and I hope at that point he will offer a public apology to me and everyone else he taught in his ventures as a professor. 

I can tell you that I am already waiting for it.

Laura Gerald

The North Carolina State Director of Public Health was apparently too busy on the 14th to attend and defend fluoridation so I will dedicate very little space debating her vapid and empty written statements.  One only has to listen to Rebecca King read the redundant words of Laura Gerald to know instantly which agency’s script is being repeated ad nauseam.  Laura’s statements share stunning similarity to Rebecca and Kevin Buchholtz’ testimony so can only be taken as more personal opinions from the peanut gallery.  When are these people going to wake up and realize that they are just another person born on the planet like you and me?

I will say that there was a hilarious though pathetic effort made by Director of the Health Board Gayle Harris to use Laura’s African ethnicity as a way to legitimize or somehow overpower past statements made by me in September 2012.

My statements which were referenced previously in this report alluded to civil rights activists Bernice & Alveda King MLK Jr’s Relatives) who condemned community water fluoridation in numerous public statements. If you actually listen to what I say the statements were clearly meant as encouragement to the board to stand on the side of civil rights and social justice, not necessarily because those people were black.  By this metric it’s ironically Gayle Harris who is using the race card, whilst reflecting that inner truth on to me by insinuating I made some kind of “assertion” about black people.

Listen below as Health Board Chair Gayle Harris states with pride that Laura is “African American” which somehow must grant her magical powers that make fluoridation a healthy proposition:

The Culminating Event

I did not last very long in the question and answer period.  I began to notice some legitimate questions being asked but no legitimate answers being offered in return.  I could easily see the deception playing out before me which framed this substance FSA as an inert & natural substance.

The first such question was posed by James Miller, who asked Amy Keyworth if groundwater fluoride was the same substance that is added to Durham’s drinking water.

Her response was that Fluoride is an ion – so therefore it uniformly exists wherever it is found naturally.  This might be true in her area of expertise but her lack of contextual information on the policy of water fluoridation is exposed instantly when she and the other experts  nods her head “yes” to the question.

The bitter truth which the council hates me repeating is that our city forces each citizen to pay for a Class 8 Corrosive Substance, the waste product filtered off the smoke stacks of phosphate manufacturing, bled at a consistent rate of 1 ppm directly into your drinking water for over 60 years.  When one calculates the actual damage done by this practice, it can only be considered a crime against humanity.

The Aftermath

Since I was forced to leave the building and not return, I only had my girlfriend as a mole in the now private health board meeting to capture the event. Unfortunately at the time I was using her phone to record the sheriff escorting me out, so we do not have video or recordings of what ensued after I left.  I have decided to dedicate a separate post to recount and detail what happened afterwards according to my girlfriend Charlee’s witness testimony.  Stay tuned!