Dentist have no authority outside the oral cavity-These are quotes from scholarly doctors...I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effects on a long range basis. Any attempt to use water this way is deplorable." - Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, Past President of the American Medical Association. "fluoridation ... it is the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated and it has been perpetrated on more people than any other fraud has." - Dr. Professor Albert Schatz, (Microbiology),nobel prize winner, co-discoverer of Streptomycin, the cure for tuberculosis and numerous other bacterial infections. see the photos and comments on this facebook site: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=6404348583

What's all this hoobajoob about Northern Health disagreeing with City Council's wise decision to remove fluoride from the drining water in Fort St. John? Haven't they ever heard of the informed and learned sage Dorothy Folk? Alongside with Brian Ruddell they form the most educated team known on the planet! Why, people from around the world have been known to travel for months on end to seek an audience with laureates Folk and Ruddell! What does a team of professionally trained and educated scientists and doctors know, anyways? Wow, I don't think I could lay much more sarcasm on to this...

Have a gander at this article on how medical papers can be flawed- are you quoting people because what they say supports your cause? http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/339/jul20_3/b2680

Government official spokesman with the CDC,FDA,EPA must misinform the public as the current science proves no measurable ingested benefit. They cite old endorsements and claims of 60 years of studies but wisely do not show a single study to prove their claims. With a white hot passion they must promote because their job and the honor of their agencies is on the line. Deception is the coin of the realm and dentists are the rear guard to add credibility with their trust factor. They are the least qualified of all to speak to the whole body cumulative toxic effects as by training and regulation they are not qualifed to speak outside the oral cavity. Yoder K.M. 2007 on pubmed.com proves most get fluoride science incorrect for the oral cavity also. But in a united front we hear the same lie so often most believe it must be true. Fact is all researchers now prove no measurable ingested pre eruptive benefit which is the bedrock foundation of the fluoridation theory. Tooth enamel forms in infants under 9 and slightly too much fluoride as fluoridation provides will cause hypominerized brittle porous discolored and stainable enamel in about half the kids on multiple teeth. Another 25% with lessor damage on only one tooth. The most current CDC data and UK York 2000 showed 15% damaged before fluoridation and 48% with fluoridation but 12.5% so damaged as to need cosmetic restoration. The huge York review 2000 also showed in the top 3200 studies they looked at not a single one was high quality Class A bias unlikely. Poor quality poorly designed is the norm in over 6 decades of deception . Under the radar is the fact that in 2005 11 EPA professional unions asked congress to immediate halt of fluoridation upon new peer reviewed cancer risk data alone. Also mentioned is ingested fluorides have no measurable benefit and if correct science is followed Fluorides would have a goal like other cumulative toxins arsenic and lead of ZERO. Lead is less toxic then fluorides and arsenic just slightly more but the allowed levels are 15ppb lead ,10ppb arsenic 4000ppb fluoride. 267 times more fluoride is claimed safe by our government then lead. Here is the ugly twist that H2SiF6 the fluoridation chemical is the primary source of lead in a homes water as it leaches lead from brass and solder when it sits in the pipes and also is a corrosive causing huge damage to pumps,sensors, pipes in water plants and in our homes besides leaching lead. Seems like more then three strikes already. Our government refs have their eyes shut for our safety. The FDA to date has never reviewed much less approved any ingested fluoride compound. It is a new unapproved after 64 years of use and was grandfathered in as used prior to 1938 law but when pushed could only find that was for rat poison and insecticide. Close enough for government work. The 2006 NRC did confirm by 12-0 vote the current goal is not protective.(not safe) but the EPA management still refuses to revise downward. So the EPA union experts did the math following safety law guidelines and ZERO is the correct safe number if those at risk are to be protected at current fluoride dose . Babies are at highest risk and highest exposure which the ADA and CDC confirmed when they warned to not use fluoridated water to make infant formula or cereal or drink. No one has told the public yet and the health departments deny the warning exists as they only know safe for all and everyone benefits slogans. They are worse then useless and many dentists march behind following the lies..Just ignoring the science. http://www.fluoridealetrt.org or a excellent site from Canada is http://www.waterloowatch,.com Both have many shot expert videos and links to the current science. Most dentists just read from the comic book versions of talking points so to keep the truth from leaking out. In the US this huge increase in ugly teeth has been a huge windfall of income. This conflict of interest is of great concern to honest people. I just rad a article showing cosmetic repair income double in 10 years. This is sweet cream from the cash cow fluoridation provides. Be concerned. This is a conflict of interest and you can not have informed consent if the fact are denied. A huge amount of government data is ignored so the sheep can follow never being spooked. Goats do it at the slaughter house and dentists in our towns and cities. Always follow the money. Not long ago dentists made less the doctors but now the opposite is true. In the US most flat refuse to treat poor kids on medicaid as there is not enough money in it. Forced fluoridation is their answer to many prayers. CDC data has shown from the first study until today blacks were always damaged double of whites with more and uglier dental fluorisis. Social inequities widen with fluoridation . Pizzo 2007 looked at the last 5 years of studies and no decrease in social inequities happens with fluoridation. When fluoridation ends cavities do not increase either . Exact opposite of what we are told by our trusted officials. Trust less and verify more often.

Hi Jim- your article would be much more powerful if you learned the proper use of the comma, the period, and the semi-colon. Thanks again for providing material to read that doesn't contain run-on sentences and eye-blurring formatting. I can't even make it through what I think is the first paragraph without getting a headache.

While they are well-meaning, studies have been done to show that dental professionals are not up to speed on current fluoride science. For example, see http://tinyurl.com/Yoder Dentists and most North American physicians' are untrained to discern fluoride toxicity to the body as well as Doctors from India are trained to do. See: http://tinyurl.com/Susheela A 52-year-old American (New York) man’s arthritic-like joint pain and immobility went away after he stopped brushing his teeth with fluoridated toothpaste, according to a study in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research There’s no scientific dispute that large fluoride doses cause crippling skeletal fluorosis over time. (See. http://www.nalgonda.org/fluorosis/victims.htm) But, “less well-known causes of chronic fluoride toxicity include fluoride supplements, certain teas and wine and some toothpastes,” report researchers Kurland, et al. Skeletal fluorosis often results in abnormal bone hardening and thickening (osteosclerosis) with painful and impaired neck and spine mobility, spine curvature, and/or painful lower extremities ultimately causing crippling and incapacitation, report the researchers. In this case, the only obvious fluoride exposure was toothpaste. The patient drank no fluoridated water, tea or wine; had no occupational fluoride exposure; did not chew tobacco, inhale snuff, cook with Teflon pots, use fluoridated mouthwash or get fluoride treatments at twice-yearly dentist visits. But he brushed before and after all meals (minimum 6 times daily) with fluoridated toothpaste. Fluoride was elevated in his serum, urine and iliac crest (bone), the researchers report. Within 8 months of eliminating all obvious fluoride sources, the patient’s urinary and blood fluoride levels dropped and bone function markers showed clear cut improvement, the researchers report. “By approximately two years after diagnosis and apparent elimination of excess fluoride exposure, the patient had complete resolution of his neck immobility and no longer required analgesics,” the researchers write. Roos, et al. documents a woman whose painful swollen fingers healed after she ceased eating fluoridated toothpaste.(2) Whyte, et al. report a woman’s fluoride-caused debilitating joint pains disappeared when her two-gallon-a-day iced tea habit stopped.(3) Eichmiller, et al. report a patient’s leg and joint pains from a dentist-prescribed high-concentration fluoride product.(4) Osteoarthritis is linked to water fluoride in a Turkish study.(6) A 2009 Brazilian study shows that, after brushing with a fluoridated dentifrice, a substantial amount of fluoride is ingested by children. (7) More about skeletal fluorosis: http://www.fluoridealert.org/s-fluorosis.htm and arthritis http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/bone/fluorosis/arthritis/

Guilty as charged. I also wonder how I got through college with good grades. Not my English skills for sure. So is my poor punctuation more a risk to health then Fluoridation? At least you have a choice not to read but no one has a choice not to drink. Contract law says a food product has a implied factor of safety when used as directed or normal use. If you feel a need to dispose of toxic waste for industry please do not let me stop you. You might even want your neighbors share but it is costly to seperate from the healthy calcium magnesium we so need for healthy bones and teeth. Have you actually commented on fluoridation or is punctuation your issue? Good luck with your cause. Please pray for divine intervention for myself. Thank you very much for your concern.

The dental professionals should be embarrassed to ignore the scientific research from the last 10 to 20 years. We expect better from them. (www.fluoridealert.org) Many city and state newspapers have reported on the failure of fluoridation such as the Boston Globe and the Cincinnati Enquirer. Boston’s water system has been fluoridated since 1978 (Boston Globe) City to launch battle against dental 'crisis' About 90 percent of 107 Boston high school students were found to need dental treatment, according to a 1996 unpublished study. That report also estimated that the city's students had four times more untreated cavities than the national average,.:  Cincinnati has had fluoridated water since 1979. The Cincinnati Enquirer  ----    Special Report: Cincinnati's dental crisis Shortage, cost can be torture for poor The number of urgent dental cases in the city's health clinics has nearly tripled since 1990, jumping from 3,437 to 10,030. Similar reports on the failure of fluoridation come from Michigan, New York, Connecticut, Kentucky and others. Many cities also have reported the same such as Detroit, Pittsburgh, New York and Washington, DC .

Whether you made it through collage with good grades or not does not excuse you for being lazy and losing touch with literary grammar rules. They're there for a reason, reading comprehension being one of the first things to falter when someone cuts corners on their writing. Fluoridation or not has nothing to do with a person letting you know that your ideas would be better off with a little time taken to their wording and construction. Perhaps you should go back to collage and take a refresher English course, and see how your notorious grammar skills stack up to a ornery collage professors' scrutiny. If you have a cause, hopefully its worth a little more of your time and care- for if it's not worth your time, why should it be worth mine?

col⋅lage   /kəˈlɑʒ, koʊ-/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kuh-lahzh, koh-] Show IPA noun, verb, -laged, -lag⋅ing. Use collage in a Sentence See web results for collage See images of collage –noun 1. a technique of composing a work of art by pasting on a single surface various materials not normally associated with one another, as newspaper clippings, parts of photographs, theater tickets, and fragments of an envelope. col⋅lege   /ˈkɒlɪdʒ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kol-ij] Show IPA Use college in a Sentence See web results for college See images of college –noun 1. an institution of higher learning, esp. one providing a general or liberal arts education rather than technical or professional training. Compare university. Gazzlo, don't be so quick to criticize. LOL

I’m impressed with the decision to remove fluoride from Fort St. John water. This is a bold stroke of common sense and I salute the citizens who pressed the issue. Equally so, I’m impressed and indebted to the elected public officials who acted on the concern of an engaged electorate. They listened, did independent research, and then rendered a decision based on the evidence. Unfortunately, the process is becoming more the exception than the rule. Here in Alaska we had a major win in 2007 after Juneau held a formal investigation into the pros and cons of fluoridation. It went on for two years, looking broadly and deeply at the science and the political history of fluoride. One of the most effective voices was Dr. Hardy Limeback, BSc, PhD, DDS, the Univ. of Toronto dental school professor. His presentation to the fluoride commission members laid bare the lie of fluoridation. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/limeback.htm Now, in Fort St. John, we see a replay of what happened in Juneau. Losing at the level of local elected officials making good decisions, the fluoride pushers want to hold an election and let everyone vote. Seems fair, but here’s what happened in Juneau. The ADA and the pushers lost because a fair and open review of the science made it clear that fluoride is a poison; it harms children and adults; and allows industry to dump pollution into North America’s rivers, lakes and streams. The ADA set out to put the question on the ballot and they soon gathered enough signatures to secure the vote. Almost before the ink dried, the Chicago boys from the ADA started spreading a lot of money around Juneau. Working hand and glove with state and federal govt health officials, the ADA covered the town in an advertising blizzard. Radio, TV, newspapers and phone calls were used to pitch the lie about fluoride. It went on for months; the intention was to beat the community into submission. Juneau’s clean water advocates were not as many as you’d think. Surprisingly, most greenies and enviros did not walk their talk; they didn’t want to get involved. Obviously, a huge blind spot in their vision of a healthy world. Although small in number, the clean water folks were a sharp group, just as I’m sure are the leaders in FSJ. They were on home ground and knew how to reach out to people who mattered, those who would vote based on evidence, not slanted advertising. In the runup to the Nov. 2007 election, the fluoride pushers’ media buys totaled nearly $180,000. The clean water advocates’ advertising and media totaled less than $9,000. When the votes were counted clean water was the clear winner. The pushers picked up just 38 percent of the vote. A decisive majority, 62 percent, voted to keep the fluoride. "Never underestimate the power of a small group of committed people to change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has." (Margaret Mead)

In the runup to the Nov. 2007 election, the fluoride pushers’ media buys totaled nearly $180,000. The clean water advocates’ advertising and media totaled less than $9,000. When the votes were counted clean water was the clear winner. The pushers picked up just 38 percent of the vote. A decisive majority, 62 percent, VOTED TO KEEP THE WATER CLEAN. "Never underestimate the power of a small group of committed people to change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has." (Margaret Mead)

When the votes were counted clean water was the clear winner. The pushers picked up just 38 percent of the vote. A decisive majority, 62 percent, VOTED FOR CLEAN WATER, NO FLUORIDE. "Never underestimate the power of a small group of committed people to change the world. In fact, it is the only thing that ever has." (Margaret Mead)

Douglas Yates

Yes, I am prone to mistakes like everyone- yet I try to take a little time and care when I compose.

I am shocked that our Public Health Agencies would allow such a toxic substance (more toxic than the lead they removed from our paint) to be added to our water without extensive studies. What is added to our water is a toxic waste substance that industry is not even allowed to put it into the ocean. To add this to our water as a drug, the dosage is going to be extremely varied if an adult drinks 2 glasses of water and a child drinks 10 glasses, common sense should tell you this not a good system of distribution. We probably only drink 1% if that, of the water that we consume the rest goes to polluting our rivers, does this make sense? The suggestion if we do not want this in our drinking water, we should buy expensive filtration equipment to take it out, but while showering and bathing we absorb more toxins through our skin and lungs directly into the blood stream than we do from drinking the stuff and flouride is difficult to remove. If people want to take flouride because they believe it will be beniffical to thier health give them a shovel full to take home free of charge. There are many health concerns associated with flouride including dental problems, cancer, arthritis, interferance with immune system,calcification of the pineal gland, lower IQ (Hitler used it in the consentration camps to " Dumb down" the prisoners and make them more dosile) and who knows how many of our new ailments are related to the toxins in our air, water and food. Please people don't just accept this, someone is willing to spend a lot of money to force this on us but aren't willing to answer the question of safety or the truth about lack of bennifits of flouride. Is it worth the risk. The studies they rely on were flawed, the Dentist was found guilty of manipulating the results, but the wheels were in motion and the judgement was ignored. Your lives and health are truly in jeoprody, do YOUR research, make an intelligent decision.. At least give us the choice to be drugged or not to be drugged.

I am wondering how many of you attended the presentation put on by Northern Health to get the other side of the story? Information is everything. There is a lot of information out there and I am glad that City Council is taking the time to get both sides of the story before making a decision on the matter.

Gazzlo, I don't mean to be picky here, but if I was going to comment on another person's post, I would most certainly ensure that my grammar and spelling skills were impeccable. Not only did you use the word "collage" in place of "college," as previously mentioned, you also made several other errors. For instance, in the sentence "they're there for a reason, reading comprehension being one of the first things to falter when someone cuts corners on their writing," you should have used "his/her" in place of "their." "Their" implies plural, whereas, "someone," is singular. Using both in the same sentence, when referring to the same thing, is a "no no" in correct word usage. You used the word "its," when you should have used "it's," a contraction meaning "it is." You also made an error when you wrote "a ornery," rather than "an ornery." When writing and speaking, you must always use "an" if the following word begins with a vowel. Lastly, you used the apostrophe incorrectly in "professors' scrutiny." You should have written "professor's scrutiny." Using "professors'" to show possession implies more than one professor. Those are simply the most obvious and blatant errors; I am sure that I could find a few more. When I initially saw the word "collage" in your post, I honestly thought you had made errors in an attempt to be facetious. You do not have a clue what you are talking about when it comes to proper grammar and punctuation, yet you somehow felt justified in correcting someone else? Perhaps, you should take your own advice and enroll in a "collage" refresher course.

Unbelievable that city fathers would listen to such drivel and make such an important decision without holding a referendum. The public needs to be educated (not by the likes of Dorothy Folk) and consulted. This is a huge embarrassment.

......but hiding behind an anonymous user name dilutes the strength of your comments.

Many of us are hiding behind user names simply because we are members of community organizations, work for companies and have friends all of whom may not share our views; however, there are some people who link our views to the people/places that we are affiliated with. When in a promenent position in the community or at a company, I know that I wouldn't want my views to be associated with the company I keep or work for as these are my own personal views. Many people associated peoples thoughts and feelings with that persons surroiundings. We are all individuals and I'm sure these "hidden" user names are only there to protect them, their families, their friends and their livelyhood.