Loading
Subscribe to FAN's FREE Newsletter. Join the fight to get our water clean!

Suppression of Scientific Dissent on Fluoride's Risks and Benefits

"[T]he political profluoridation stance has evolved into a dogmatic, authoritarian, essentially antiscientific posture, one that discourages open debate of scientific issues." - Dr. Edward Groth, Senior Scientist, Consumers Union, 1991.

“Journal editors often have refused for political reasons to publish information that raises questions about fluoridation.” - Chemical & Engineering News, August 1, 1988.

“We are left with compelling evidence that powerful interests with high financial stakes have colluded to prematurely close honest discussion and investigation into fluoride toxicity." - Dr. Sheldon Krimsky, Tufts University, August 16, 2004.

“The Public Health Service, unfortunately, has locked itself into a position where it has made this statement on the record that there is absolutely no hazard to fluoridating public water supplies and the matter is closed. Now, that, of course, is immediately an unscientific approach.” - Ralph Nader, Consumer Advocate, 1971.


RECENT NEWS


1) INTRODUCTION


2) SCIENTISTS FIRED FOR SPEAKING OUT

1992 - Dr. William Marcus - Chief Toxicologist, Office of Drinking Water, Environmental Protection Agency, USA.

1994 - Dr. Phyllis Mullenix - Chair of Toxicology, Forsythe Dental Institute, Massachusetts, USA.


3) SCIENTIFIC FRAUD?

Harvard Fluoride/Bone Cancer Cover-Up:

EPA's Alteration of Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride:

Suppression of Concerns about use of fluoridated water in infant formula:


4) EXAGGERATING THE BENEFITS?


5) UNWILLING TO DEBATE?


6) ADDITIONAL HISTORY

Back to top


Yor Donation Helps

You can help support our efforts to initiate legislative changes
and spread our message.