(C) A. Young, September 2007.


The mechanics/morals of the situation can be graphically represented as per the table below. Upon understanding this simple truth, you be the judge.

Scoop! Orica-WaterCare's Fluorodose - The product SA Water intends to use to fluoridate Mount Gambier Blue Lake water supply.

In years gone by, sodium fluoride powder posed a risk for the operators whose responsibility was to add it to municipal water supplies. This would involve scooping the powder by hand and placing it into some sort of pre-mix water tank. The handling procedures for such a poisonous chemical stipulated that the operator wear sufficient protective gear and face masks to avoid skin contact and breathing in of airborne particles. Fluorodose addresses that hazard, by using water soluble bags.  Protection for the operator, but what of the citizen? Analyze the Fluorodose product brochure and its corresponding MSDS below.

Orica WaterCare - Fluorodose Brochure Page 1
Orica WaterCare - Fluorodose Brochure Page 2
Orica WaterCare - Fluorodose Brochure Page 3
Orica WaterCare - Fluorodose Brochure Page 4
Orica WaterCare - Fluorodose Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)
Spectrum Chemical USA Sodium Fluoride Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)

Note: The additional UPS-imposed hazardous material charge when ordered. Hmmm even the authorities admit its toxicity, but where is the rationale in denying a community a choice to have referendum on the matter? Play It Backward! Remember DDT & plutonium injections? Are we really that stupid?

September 1970 - Ms. Helen-Leslie Gebhardt (founder Gebhardts Real Estate) gained a total of 7,139 signatures on a No-Fluoride petition out of an registered electorate of approximately 10,000 households in Mount Gambier. She being of spirit was instrumental in stopping the push for fluoride at that time. By 1971, the State Government had backed down on the matter.

I guess people back then remembered a time when fluoride was first put into toothpaste when the aluminium tubes use to corrode. They tried to solve this by adding a layer of gel between the tube and the paste itself. Plastic toothpaste tubes resolved this problem. Interestingly, all towns fluoridated in the past, whether in Australia or overseas, saw an increase in the degree of corrosion in metal pipes and other fixtures, which was an unexpected bonus for the plumbing and refrigerant industries.

Ms. Gebhardt received a lot of correspondence from people all over the world, here is a sample of some as found in the historical archives at the Mount Gambier Public Library. From an industry/economic vs. society/environment point of view the sentiments expressed in these nostalgic documents of yesteryear remain equally valid today:

• Photo of sodium fluoride operator from the USA - here
  (Compare above with "new" technological delivery of Fluorodose - Pages 1, 2, 3 & 4. Brochure supplied by SA Water)

• Sweeney product label circa 1950's - here

• How else can they get rid of their fluorides? circa 1960's - here

• Profit without Honour 1, London, circa 1960's - here

• Profit without Honour 2, London circa 1960's - here

THE DILEMMA OF NO CHOICE.

July 2005 - The State Government held a National Oral Health Plan Public Consultation Meeting at the Serde Business in Mount Gambier. This consultation meeting was advertised in the Border Watch on 6 July 2005 (see here) with the actual meeting taking place two days later on 8 July 2005.

The ad made no mention of water fluoridation being one of the key issues up for discussion. Some members of the Grant District Council apparently went to this meeting and consented on behalf of the public without their knowledge. The Border Watch ran a small article on 13 July 2005 which covered the so called 8 July 2005 meeting. See here.

February 2007 - With front page headlines, The Border Watch alerted the SE Community that the State Government was going ahead in yet another push for water fluoridation for Mount Gambier. Ms. Gebhardt would be rolling in her grave. PlayItForward wrote to Editor of the Border Watch, expressing concerns for community choice and the need for a local referendum on the issue.

Almost concurrently as a result of that original Border Watch front page article, some members of the SE Community formed a group called Network Against Fluoride (NaF) and put up an informative website called www.fluoridefreeblueLake.org

March 2007 - A total of 1,433 signatures were gained requesting for a referendum to take place. On 7 March 2007, Mr Rory McEwen made the following speech before SA Parliament - read here. Mr McEwen makes a number of comments which need some attention with comments in red:

• "Also, I pointed out that all Australia's capital cities (and, I believe, all other large rural cities the size of Mount Gambier and bigger) have been fluoridating their water for between 30 and 40 years." FALSE The city of Brisbane in QLD is not fluoridated. 30 years experience huh?

• "I did admit that I could not see why the City of Mount Gambier could not hold such a referendum" Really? Then why haven't you supported it? Another one fallen by the wayside.

• "but could anyone credibly believe that a government, on behalf of a community, would inject into their water supply untreated toxic waste from inside fertiliser factory smoke stacks? " YES I can believe that a government would be capable of that. On 23rd May 2007, I wrote to the Border Watch (read here) and issued a challenge for seeing evidence otherwise that proved its actual source. So far none has been forthcoming. For actual links to the origins of sodium fluoride see the Resources section below.

May 2007 - A majority of the Councilors at the Mount Gambier City Council agreed that sufficient consultation had not taken place and the motion was passed to write a letter to the Minister for Health - John Hill MP, requesting that such a public community consultation indeed take place.

Read Mr John Hill's response here.

The City Council is stuck in a bind over the State Government's unrelenting push to go ahead and fluoridate our water. The State Government is claiming that a public consultation had taken place in July 2005. See above.

June 2007 - Mount Gambier City Council rightly states that the 6 July advertisement is misleading. Even though some of its members agree with the State Government push for water fluoridation, one particular Councilor has been quite emotional in his actions towards other members of the Council and the community as featured in 22 June 2007 edition of the Border Watch.

Play It Forward does not condone this kind of behavior and wonders why mindsets such as these are allowed to serve the community. For their constitution is not a constituent of their conscience, nor ours. This goes along way to explain the emotional outbursts that has been observed. PlayItForward encourages both people for and against fluoride to remember that we are all human and that courtesy and respect should be extended at all times. Human worth should not be devalued due to personal viewpoint.

SA Water has admitted to Play It Forward that the toxicity of sodium fluoride is well known. They went on to say however that once suitably diluted in water, that the toxic potential is negligible. What is not immediately obvious to the general public is that it is this purported same toxicity that kills oral bacteria, leading to less acids being produced as less bacteria is present, resulting in a small decrease in tooth decay.

Of course this minor oral benefit is largely offset, depending on what kind of foods and drinks we consume by choice. High sugary foods and excessive carbohydrate intake lowers the pH value in the mouth, i.e. creates a more acidic oral state, thus creating a more favorable environment for oral bacteria to thrive. The issue is, is that it is the toxicity of sodium fluoride that kills bad bacteria,  then, the chemical itself being unable to discriminate, means that good organisms and organic components conducive to optimal health are also targeted equally. Therefore to swallow fluoridated water introduces a negative mechanism whereby normal body functions are potentially disrupted due to an increase in toxic loading.

Play It Forward poses a further question to the reader, one of common sense, if only half of the diluted poison is excreted by the body, what are the long term effects say 20 to 30 years later of the build up of such a chemical in the body? And by default wouldn't most people opt to abstain from long term consumption of an S6 chemical poison? You don't have to be a scientist to understand logic. The problem is that good science is often perturbed by organized capital interests. Some readers may be familiar with doctored science, whereby scientific results and scientific reports are purposely altered to meet a defined requirement.

Play It Forward would like to see democracy served via a binding referendum regardless of the final vote. I would prefer to uphold the decision of the Community rather than a State Government who doesn't listen to its electors and is imposing this move without proper community consultation. The structure of power is wrong in this instance and needs to change. The power should lay with the People. As can be ascertained from the "How Else Can They Get Rid of their Fluorides?" picture above from Ms Gebhardt's time, one can immediately understand the reason for this undemocratic push. Is it possible that so many smart people can be conned? The answer is unfortunately - yes. Intelligence in the modern age very rarely has anything to do with wisdom, wisdom being defined as the application of knowledge. One can be gifted in one area and inept in another.

August 2007 - PlayItForward visits the Warrnambool Public Town meeting. Knowing that the fluoride rollout for Mount Gambier is due mid 2008, plans were set underway for our own public town meeting. Members of NaF were approached and declined involvement due to other commitments.

September 2007 - With the help of Robert Goodchild, Leon Ashby of Bushvision, PlayItForward starts planning for the town meeting to be held in mid November.

PlayItForward visits the office of Rory McEwen MP for some help in this matter. Right at the outset Mr McEwen stated that he had had over 30 years experience in water fluoridation. When asked about the 6 July 2005 ad, Mr McEwen response was - "that meeting was never designed to address water fluoridation". Smiles. PlayItForward immediately posed a further question - "if that is true, then why does Minister John Hill keep referring to it as such?". Mr McEwen was unable to answer the question and changed the emphasis of our conversation. Mr McEwen also claimed that he had already put forward to the City Council that Mount Gambier should have a referendum on the issue, but following this up with the Council CEO, Mr Greg Muller said "I am not aware of such a claim".

Mr McEwen also kept maneuvering our conversation away from Mount Gambier, and to a State point of view, saying - "why should Mount Gambier be treated any differently?" and "let's have a State referendum instead". PlayItForward felt that the undertakings of a State referendum was a method of distraction that sought not to deal with the local issues at hand.  A truth will remain a truth and remain unscathed when scrutinized. Subversion of a truthful reality, amounting to lies, created to cover an inconsistency, will not. Unfortunately the meeting went unrecorded and it would not come as a surprise if at some point in the future, Mr McEwen would choose to deny or blame PlayItForward for taking statements out of context. PlayItForward assures the reader that these statements are true. 

PlayItForward also posed the following quote from the Hansard to Mr McEwen and asked him to explain the creation and delegation of powers of our SA Health Minister - "By What Authority? does Minister John Hill have the right to make such a decision on behalf of Mount Gambier?".

“It is a community choice as to whether water is fluoridated out of the Blue Lake…”

Source: SA Hansard, 26 June 2001, former SA Premier, Hon. Dean Brown.

I asked Mr McEwen why a former SA Premier would right attribute the authority to the People in this instance. I do not recall his exact words to this, but his response was such that he sought to minimize its meaning. It was only 6 years ago and surely nothing had changed from the time it was said in Parliament. No laws have changed or been introduced in regards to the adoption of fluoride in our State, even since the 70's when the State Government relented to the public. The question was asked again - "by what authority?" and reminded Mr McEwin that legislation creates the authority. Mr McEwen said that the Health Act empowers the Health Minister to make any decision he so chooses. PlayItForward  asked to be shown the relevant act and section. He didn't know, but promised to send PlayItForward via email. PlayItForward promptly gave him our PlayItForward email address. [Still no email - Ed.]

As usual, if you want anything done properly, one has to do it themselves. PlayItForward  went home and looked up the South Australian Health Commission Act 1976. PlayItForward  has shortened the Act it to include only the relevant sections pertaining to authority as found here. The full Act can be found here.

Of particular interest is the distinction which is made in the Act between "public" and "any section of the public". That means that Ministerial leeway can be allowed for when dealing with health issues that concern a section of the public and that those concerns can be heeded to independently of the State. And Mount Gambier is definitely a section of the wider pubic community of the State of South Australia.

A public meeting is organized for Monday, November 19th 2007 at St Martins Lutheran College, 7.30pm, 2 St Martins Drive, Mount Gambier.
Refer to the flyer - Page 1, Page 2

October 2007 - A heartfelt thanks to Merilyn Haines in Queensland who donated $500.00. Thanks to Ron Chuck of Gebhardts Real Estate who contributed $250. Thanks to Robert Goodchild for introduction to Mr Alan Scott who donated a sum of $250 and other SE businesses who contributed also. This money has paid for our printing of 10,000 community flyers, invitations and hall hire. 118 letters of invitations were sent to various SA Senators and MPs, the South Australian and National branch of the Australian Dental Association, various dental professionals in the South East community and others (see below for speakers list).

Many community members of Mount Gambier have helped with letter box dropping of the flyers. To all who have helped in this regard, we say thank you.

The three speakers to speak against fluoride are:-

• Dr Andrew Harms, Bach. Dental Surgery (Adelaide University), Royal Australian Air Force dentist (1978-83), private practice, Australian Dental Association, President of South Australian ADA - 1996, Adelaide) who use to promote water fluoridation to rural SA

• David McRae - David has worked in community health and health promotion organizations for over 20 years. He also privately works in health education and stress management in Victoria. He is a founder of consumer advocacy group Water Quality Australia, and has published articles showing that the promotion of water fluoridation is grossly misleading, relying on exaggerating benefits and ignoring disturbing evidence of its health risks.

• Phillip Robertson - BHSc, ND, formerly lecturer in Health Sciences at Victoria University has practiced as a Naturopath in both Melbourne and Geelong. His current clinical practice includes working as a consultant in functional pathology testing, Carmoora Clinic, Geelong.

Invitations for speakers from the government and related health authorities to educate us about fluoride have been sent out to the following persons or organizations that promote fluoridation:-

• SA Health Minister John Hill

• Minister for Water Security - Hon. Karlene Maywald.

• Australian Dental Association (both SA and National)

• Professor Spencer - Australian Research Centre (Adelaide University)

• Jason Armfield - Australian Research Centre (Adelaide University)

• SA Water

19 October 2007 - PlayItForward has a second meeting with Rory McEwen. He asked how the planning for the meeting was going. PlayItForward  said good thank you, still trying to find a neutral chairperson after the ToastMaster's association had fallen through.

The conversation proceeded by talking about credibility and having credible people administer the meeting. Rory called the citizen meeting an ambush. When asked what the alternatives where, being either one of three sources: State government organized (done so so - one sided), Council organized (well that doesn't appear to be happening) and citizen organized. No pro-fluoride citizen or silent majority is going to organize one as by default water is getting fluoridated anyway. So that leaves the credible "noisy minority".

PlayItForward reminded Mr McEwen that he still had not sent the relevant Act which creates the powers of the Health Minister by email as promised from our first meeting. He mumbled something about having had given it to his secretary to deal with. Right, maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but one of the secretaries didn't know about it when I asked at the front counter afterwards.

PlayItForward presented to Mr McEwen, the SA Health Commissions Act 1976 in trying to ascertain the proper authority on this issue.  Mr McEwen said straight off it wasn't the right Act and immediately handed it back without so much as a single glance.  Good on ya Rory! The Act to be handed back and PlayItForward  affirmed that it was the correct Act.  The heading was clear - "Powers and functions of Minister under Act".  He conceded. When asked about Section 15.K - about advancement to public interest and whether the public interest had been advanced in this instance, I had to remind him after several attempts that he still not had answered the question. I am sure most people are aware that very rarely do politicians answer questions directly. Funnily enough he accused PlayItForward about jumping around in our last meeting.

PlayItForward also posed to Rory his statement as made to SA Parliament on 7 March - "but could anyone credibly believe that a government, on behalf of a community, would inject into their water supply untreated toxic waste from inside fertiliser factory smoke stacks?". PlayItForward was happy to hear that the word credible again. Given Rory's self proclaimed 30 experience in fluoride issues, PlayItForward asked that if sodium fluoride wasn't to be found from the end result of aluminium smelter smoke stacks or super phosphate fertiliser production, then where was it sourced from? Rory quickly wanted to move on. Weren't we talking about credibility? This is on record on the Hansard. And he never answered the question.

PlayItForward also showed Mr McEwen a picture of a Victorian male operator wearing protective gear and face mask, contracted obviously by the Victorian health department. The geared up person is carrying a bag of sodium hexasilicofluoride with a "may contain heavy metals" warning label on it. See here. Obviously the conversation turned quickly about chemical toxicity in small concentrations. Mr McEwen said that sodium fluoride was "clean, pure and safe in small quantities". PlayItForward immediately asked for a pen to write the statement. Rory nervously laughed, but hey you can't deny the record. 30 years experience right? Finally an MP who knows what he is talking about - clean, pure and safe, but order today and we'll throw in some heavy metals with your order! Please excuse our attempt at humour here.

When the example above was given to Mr McEwen, in each case each column represents a choice by the end consumer, and that such consumption of toxic products would subtract from the overall human experience from a health perspective (each person to their own), Rory quickly avoided the comparison and blurted out "do you drive a car?". PlayItForward responded in the affirmative - yes. "Then don't drive!", Rory exclaimed. PlayItForward related that the example he gave was inappropriate to water fluoridation because environmental pollution from vehicles and the transport industry at large was too wide a scope for comparison.

It is logistically impossible to expect that everyone should give up driving so that we can breathe clean air, which of course doesn't make sense as much pollution is also derived from elsewhere. PlayItForward affirmed that this issue was about having a choice, or the lack thereof, about what we as citizens directly consumed at the entry point to our bodies - our mouths, not our lungs. Air pollution is another whole issue altogether. Mr McEwen rightly said that the water fluoridation was about choice and mass medication, but failed to extrapolate further. Mr McEwen also related that the Council should get more involved, but knows that it wont. So the State government passes the buck to the Council and the Council points back to the State Government. And in the meantime, and in the middle, the citizen is left bewildered, wondering who has the balls to stand up for informed choice and the wanting for a balanced consensus.

The meeting concluded with no eye contact and a handshake from a scowling Mr McEwen. One had to be there to witness the before and after transformation. At the conclusion to the second meeting, Mr McEwen gave a subtle, yet half forceful push at the door as PlayItForward through the door. PlayItForward wonders how the dynamics of the push would have been different if a female or another person was present. No one had shouted at each other and views were expressed in a reasonably polite manner, but for some reason due to questions not be able to be answered and the immoral actions of the State Government so far, for might is right, a State elected representative becomes less than... what's the word?

Uneasy within their own personal constitution in performing a role which dictates a drop in moral behavior because at the deep root of this issue, despite all the feigned and lapsed professionalism, they instinctively know that sodium fluoride is a poison and no one in their right mind would drink it if they understood the full ramifications of it upon the human body.

Funny very few people seem to make the connection with their conscience that the same poisonous chemical that is legislated for by the EPA when it is released into the air and into waterways directly from aluminium smelters, yet when re-badged as a dental product, those same laws do not apply.

At this point the scene in the movie Erin Brockovich comes to mind, wherein the single glass of water sits on the table and continues to sit on the table. The inactions of those present speak a thousand words.

23 October 2007 - Media Release to Border Watch, WinTV, ABC, 5GTR, 5SE, Rhema, Star FM, SA Water and Grant and Mount Gambier City Councils. Leon Ashby (Bushvision) and Alex Young (PlayItForward & Choice Mount Gambier) attends morning ABC radio interview. Interview by Border Watch at noon.

Letter of apology received at 1.30 pm from the ADA - see here. Well, its a very short letter. Straight to the point. No courtesies as usually found in letters of apology and no reason was given for being unable to attend. Also note affirmation of their position in directing us to the ADA website for further information rather than performing responsible duties and interacting with the public.

ABC informed Choice Mount Gambier that the rights to host the 8 minute audio interview online would be $200. Choice Mount Gambier is unable to meet that expense. Bushvision will however will record the event on November 19 and place it on YouTube and a DVD will be made available to all who want it. A DVD will also be sent to each of the various State MPs and Senators who sent their apologies in being unable to attend the meeting (for SA Parliament resumes Tuesday 20 November 2007) who also requested to be kept informed about the outcome of the meeting.

PERSONAL THOUGHTS.

People naturally repel something that has potential to destroy their physical wellbeing or distract from it. We do after all, allow toxic products to enter our human system by choice, whether by knowledge or by ignorance and naiveté. Forego further reaching and other important environmental pollution issues for the moment. Closer to home, tobacco smoking is a choice. Consumption of alcohol is a choice. Consumption of fluoridated mains water, for those of us who do not have rain water tanks should also be a choice.

These three toxic product ranges mentioned above are not denied in their toxicity and none of them will kill you in the short-term and in moderation, but all will have the effect of diminishing our best human potential from the very start. Fluoride in water is the only toxin in the example which cant be regulated by choice in terms of drinking tap water alone. Not unless you have a rain water tank or a 4 stage reverse osmosis filter system to remove the sodium fluoride salts. If present, every chemical must obey its inherent programming and fluorine is a highly reactive element which when combined to form other chemicals presents a more highly reactive chemical when in situ with other more stable chemicals.

This high reactive property of fluorine or fluorides  is the basis of why it has many uses in industry e.g. glass etching, metal cleaning, oral bacteria elimination (yep! the dental industry), insecticides and pesticides and so on. Of the later, another use for fluoride is the product Profume. Profume is active sulfuryl fluoride, previously banned as a termite pesticide and which is currently being passed by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) and is to be used to fumigate fruits, nuts, grains, legumes, rice and perhaps vegetables. The APVMA claims that minimal residue is left on the foodstuffs after fumigation. Where is the logic in society?

Contrast the absence of choice of water fluoridation with the government's attempts to introduce taxation on rainwater and the fluoridation of bottled water. Choice, like the inherent properties of fluorine acting upon stable substances, both organic and inorganic, is gradually being eroded also, by legislation and industries with vested capital interests. And yet for many of us, who are asleep, the world seemingly remains the same on the surface, yet is undergoing subtle changes each passing day.

Should the State Government be successful in fluoridating Mount Gambier's water supply by mid-2008 without due respect to the wills of its citizens and the calling for a vote on the matter, I could well envisaged the smug grins of those who would therefore win without conscience. This is not a victory on any human level whatsoever. Remember that conscience is made manifest through our wills and consent. Laws are made for our protection. To better understand this - see here. But some laws exclude logic and conscience, which result in a neglect of duty of care to the public or sections of the public. 

In all this, the Mount Gambier City Council feels stuck in a bind and disempowered. And we all know where empowerment comes from? Answer: The People. The problem is one of roles. We all assume roles in society because of our training, programming, career choice etc. Providing money for the family and maintaining our lifestyle in the immediate term is paramount to most.  Certain expectations of performance and action accompany our roles. Unfortunately, in some cases, roles are also like strait jackets - they deter us from making a stand to which our conscience impels us to do.

More often than not, it is when we dispense of these roles and resume good roles, that we allow our conscience to become free again. And many have done this either by choice e.g. Andrew Wilke, formerly of the Australian Office of National Assessments (ONA). As a security analyst, Mr Wilke's role was to intercept overseas security information on the Iraq War (Gulf War 2) and land a report on the Prime Ministers desk. He was expected to write a certain result to maintain the official story of the alliance, but his conscience could not match up with his role by purposely manipulating results into a pre-expected outcome. What he saw and what he was expected to write were not consistent. His conscience won and he quit the ONA. The ONA now denies that Andrew Wilke ever worked for them.

For whatever reason and perhaps only known to the beholder, there are times when we don't listen to our conscience. Many are paid to shut up. Many suppress what they know to be right for sake of job security. We are our own judge, jury and executioner. Blame for something done or not done lies ultimately with us. The problem is, as in this issue of water fluoridation, it is a far-reaching community issue with long term implications. Don't shy from your responsibilities today with the knowledge that you wont be in role in the future. Be accountable to at least yourself and never assume that science is static and written in stone and that the white lab coat represents supreme authority. It does not. Fluoride, as Rory McEwen stated, is not "clean, pure and safe in small quantities".

THE ISSUE AT HAND.

Due to the polarization of the issues surrounding water fluoridation, one side wants fluoride for oral health only and the other side doesn't want fluoride due to ill effects on the rest of the body over a period of time, which one do we believe?

Play It Forward would like to remind the reader, democratic issues aside, of the case of the potentially adulterated raw meat. Are we sure that it is fit for human consumption? We've all had to make decisions of such nature in the past. If in doubt, spit it... I mean throw it out. Which is well within the logic as found on almost all toothpaste tubes - "Do not swallow".

There is something to be said that when a State Government organizes a "public consultation meeting" aka 8 July 2005, to which the public was not suitably informed and one in which the State Government only invited or contracted pro-fluoride persons and professionals to support that cause.

And yet when a citizen organized public meeting is held, inviting professionals from both sides, yet having not one pro-fluoride person in attendance due to a little known ADA policy that none of its members are allowed to attend such public meetings. We hope they see the human error present here. So much for trying to achieve a balanced perspective. Either way that is two negatives to the presiding powers as they have subverted the course of all that is humanly right. What is right in this instance? To be allowed to have heard viewpoints from both sides and listen to a balanced consensus on the issues surrounding water fluoridation.
 

	State Organised	Citizen Organised
Sufficiently advertised?	N	Y
Sufficient prior notice?	N (2 days)	Y (1 month)
Invites speakers for fluoride?	Y	Y
Invites speakers against fluoride?	N	Y

The citizen wants to be informed and to make decisions which best suit them and ultimately to do what is right for themselves and their family. Left unchecked, a presiding power grows corrupt from within as legislation is written continually in favour of the government and less so for the citizen. It is the duty of every citizen to help keep these forces in check, for all laws other than Divine or Universal Law is ever changing.

If Mount Gambier has a majority vote FOR FLUORIDE, then I and you the reader, will humbly accept the decision of the SE Community. If NOT, then I and again, you the reader, will also humbly accept that decision. This is the essence of proper democracy - what the majority of the citizens (or section of the public) want. The measure and mettle of those who govern our State and make our laws shall be judged in their reaction to the outcome that we, as citizens, desire.

Now institutions like the Australian Dental Association who once swore that the process of fluoride was incorporated into the lattice of the teeth have changed their minds and now say the application is purely topical. Yet some slow dentists still rattle old rattles (give them time, we understand human fallibility! Second or third opinion anyone?).

It is illegal to dump fluoride into the environment and into rivers, yet by selling it as a water based dental product, the aluminium industry has a mechanism to bypass this legislation. Amazing! It amounts to nothing more than a scam.

Remember - If in doubt about fluoride in water, use it as mouthwash or brush with it, but don't swallow and spit it out! Fluoride was never meant to be swallowed and is not an essential element for human health. Its purpose is by virtue of its known toxicity to kill oral bacteria which produces acids which cause tooth decay.

RESOURCES.

• The Politics of Fluoride by Mark Mayer

• FoodCures: Water Fluoridation

• International Anti-Fluoridation Database

• Bad Developers - Comprehensive overview of the origins of sodium fluoride and the Alcoa aluminium factories in Geelong and Portland, VIC.

• Bad Developers - ALCOA: Point Henry Smelter and Angelsea Coal Mine

• Bad Developers - Deltrex Chemicals/Pivot Fertilisers

• Australian Fluoridation News - The energy of 92 Year old Glen Walker, an Emeritus Member of the Electrochemical Society for 35 years. See this AFN website for great information on why you should oppose water fluoridation in your area.

• Fluoride History - by Peter Meiers, Saarbruecken, Germany

• How I became interested in Fluoride - by Peter Meiers, Saarbruecken, Germany