Drop of Water Onto Surface of Water
More Letters to Councillors
Letters 41-60
Water is for everyone, fluoridation toxins are not
Isn't tap water great? Yes, but many of us can NOT drink it.

LETTER # 41
From: BA <email@domain.name>
To: "Chiarelli, Rick" rick.chiarelli@ottawa.ca
Sent: Tue, June 14, 2011 10:15:49 PM
Subject: Fluoridation at City of Ottawa


Dear Councillor Rick Chiarelli

I had previously sent you an Email on the subject of fluoridation (26 March).  Since I have received neither a reply nor an acknowledgement of receipt, I must assume that you did not actually receive it. I am therefore sending it (see below) again, along with the original attachments.  I urge you to review the attachments as they are an explicit part of the presentation.

I am still interested in meeting with you to exchange views on fluoridation, and would like to set a date for such a meeting.  Would you please let me know when we could meet.

Should I not hear from you in a reasonable time, I will be glad to present a copy of this material to your constituency office, by hand.

BA

Name and address details withheld by request
LETTER # 42
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: Councillor Tim Tierney Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca
Sent: Thu, June 16, 2011 6:23:47 AM
Subject: Bureaucrats and our Water


Thursday, June 16, 2011


Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1J1


Dear Councillor Tierney,

I hope this communication finds you and your family in continued good health. There are three things that I would like to bring to your attention today regarding this subject.

Medical Officers of Health are mere bureaucrats that are totally lacking in actual, verifiable knowledge about the impact that fluoride substances have on human health. Ingestion of fluoride substances have been unequivocally shown to have no cariostatic impact even if for them it's only about teeth. Would that not explain why they have not pursued any investigations into the health effects of Artificial Drinking Water Fluoridation?

Endorsements and pronouncements by health officers concerning claimed benefits of fluoridation can hardly be regarded as science, especially when they are merely parroting the endorsements and pronouncements of other fluoridation promoters. Contrary to vaunted claims by promoters of fluoridation, it is the worst public health disaster of the 20th century and must be repealed everywhere at all cost.

In the last 3 decades, evidence has become so overwhelming that fluoridation causes harm to people's health that it can no longer be ignored. Why are health officers ignoring it?

Every statement made in this communication can be substantiated by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources.

Please do not forward a response with the standard statement from either the Dental or the Medical Officer of Health in response to this communication.

Please let me know when you intend to bring an end to the dumping of this highly toxic waste hydrofluorosilicic acid used for the fluoridation of our municipal water supply by putting forward a motion to Council for either a moratorium on this wasteful and unlawful practice until lawful, hard, verifiable and valid data are available about its benefits, or voting it out of existence because such data are non-existent?

Respectfully, in spite of your silence.


Richard Hudon, moderator for
Fluoridation-Free Ottawa – Ottawa Libre de Fluoration
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, Ontario
K1J 8B5 — 613-747-7157
Please work with us to start getting this horrible poison out of our tap water
http://ffo-olf.org/ffo-olf@rogers.com
LETTER # 43
From: LF <email@domain.name>
To: "Blais, Stephen" <Stephen.Blais@ottawa.ca>;
Sent: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 2:14:20 PM
Subject: Ottawa Municipal Water


February 9, 2011


Councillor Stephen Blais
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1J1

Hello Councillor Blais,

(NaturalNews) In January 2011, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommended reducing the levels of fluoride added to drinking water based on national survey data showing that 41 percent of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis (a visible sign of fluoride toxicity). HHS has proposed reducing the level of fluoride added to water from 0.7 to 1.2 parts per million (ppm) to 0.7 ppm, and is now soliciting public comment due by February 14.

http://www.naturalnews.com/031262_water_fluoridation_petition.html Here is the specific report paragraph outlining the 41% and I have included the link below to the HHS document.The prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis among 12 – 15 year olds in 1999-2004 were compared to estimates from the Oral Health of United States Children Survey, 1986-87, which was the first national survey to include measures of dental fluorosis. Although these two national surveys differed in sampling and representation (schoolchildren versus household), findings support the hypothesis that there has been an increase in dental fluorosis that was very mild or greater between the two surveys.In 1986-87 and 1999-2004 the prevalence of dental fluorosis was 23% and 41%, respectively, among adolescents aged 12 to 15. (Beltrán-Aguilar ED, et al, 2010a). Similarly, the prevalence of very mild fluorosis (17.2% and 28.5%), mild fluorosis (4.1% and 8.6%) and moderate and severe fluorosis combined (1.3% and 3.6%) have increased.

The estimates for severe fluorosis for adolescents in both surveys were statistically unreliable because of too few cases in the samples.http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/pre_pub_frn_fluoride.html.

Can it be much different for Canada and is it worth the risk to our children? The Ottawa 2009 results show that we were above the US proposed max at .72ppm but within their current limits which is causing their problem with dental fluorosis. Looks like a good case of 'less is better'.http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/water/wq/city_wells/wq_reports/2009_annual/brit_sum_2009_en.pdf

LF
Name and address details withheld by request
LETTER # 44
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: Tim Tierney <Tim@TimTierney.ca>
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 5:48:20 PM
Subject: June 20 email to Tim - Dereliction of Duty


Monday, June 20, 2011


Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1J1


Dear Councillor Tierney,

As one who has become an activist against Artificial Drinking Water Fluoridation since July 2010, I can only say that fluoride groups deserve a big thank you from the people of their city. These people spend countless hours of their own time and much energy and resources to try and make it possible for the people of their respective cities to be free of toxic contaminants being injected into their drinking water.

While there now exist many valid scientific studies, peer reviewed articles and much literature illustrating the negative impact of drinking water treated with fluoride contaminants such as hydrofluorosilicic acid, there are no genuine and valid studies extant anywhere illustrating any benefits whatsoever. For some unexplained and unconscionable reasons, government health authorities have refused to conduct clinical trials and toxicology studies on this medicinal product, contrary to their own regulations on the administration of medicinal products and substances.

I conclude that the continuing treatment of any municipal water supply anywhere with this inorganic compound for questionable reasons dictated by the CDA and other health authorities should cease immediately until authentic and valid scientific studies can prove that benefits truly outweigh the risks of adding this toxic waste product to our drinking water. Anything less is a dereliction of duty by elected officials.

Every statement made in this communication can be substantiated by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources.

Please do not forward a response with the standard statement from either the Dental or the Medical Officer of Health in response to this communication.

Please let me know when you intend to bring an end to the dumping of this highly toxic waste hydrofluorosilicic acid used for the fluoridation of our municipal water supply by putting forward a motion to Council for either a moratorium on this wasteful and unlawful practice until lawful, hard, verifiable and valid data are available about its benefits, or voting it out of existence because such data are non-existent?

Respectfully, in spite of your silence.


Richard Hudon, moderator for
Fluoridation-Free Ottawa – Ottawa Libre de Fluoration
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa , Ontario
K1J 8B5 — 613-747-7157
Please work with us to start getting this horrible poison out of our tap water
http://ffo-olf.org/ - ffo-olf@rogers.com
Councillor Tierney's response!

From: "Tierney, Timothy" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
To: rich.hudon@rogers.com
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 6:07:51 PM
Subject: Re: June 20 email to Tim - Dereliction of Duty

Afternoon Richard,

I have actually been reading your emails and mail.

Furthermore, I attended a fluoride meeting in January held at St. Laurent complex.

I was not impressed by the personal attacks on city councillor in the presentation that was given.

In the future, I suggest less personal attacks, and more facts and medial professionals on site.

As I am not a medical doctor I take the advice of the city's medial officer of health.

Tim

Tim Tierney
Ward / Quartier 11: Beacon Hill - Cyrville
Tel: 613-580-2481
Fax: 613-580-2521
http://twitter.com/timtierney
http://www.facebook.com/TimTierneyBeaconHillCyrville
www.BeaconHillCyrville.ca
My reply to Councillor Tierney's email

From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Timothy" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Mon, July 4, 2011 1:57:15 PM
Subject: Re: In response to yours of June 20


July 7, 2011


Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1J1


Hello Councillor Tierney,

It was good to read your response and I hope you and your family are well. With all of the toxins in our food, beverages and our environment, you never know when or what illness is going to hit. There are so many of us that have developed chemical sensitivities and allergies, apparently due in the main to the use of fluorinated products and medicines.

I thank you most sincerely for letting me know that you have been reading my emails and my mail to you. I hope I have not been too annoying or disrespectful. After all, if we are ever to work together, it would be most unfortunate that I should be the one to offend someone who might make a difference in the issue of fluoridation, spoiling any possibility of advancing this subject beyond mere information exchange and beyond confrontations. I was beginning to despair that you were not open to a different point of view on the subject of Artificial Water Fluoridation.

I am very pleased to hear that you were at that January 27 meeting on fluoridation (not to be confused with "fluoride" as noted in your email) and quite frankly, I am annoyed at myself for not having taken the opportunity to introduce myself to you. We previously had a very brief meeting and handshake during your election campaign last year. I'm sure you met so many people back then that you do not remember me, and I accept that gracefully.

I have taken some time to respond to your email out of concern for giving you an opportunity to prepare yourself for more information than just a cursory, ill thought out reply. You may find this response to your email a bit tedious, but please bear with me. I think it's important that you hear me out now that you have opened the dialogue. Though I am neither a PhD nor blooming with letters after my name, rest assured that I am well informed on any subject that I have decided to understand thoroughly. I do not mean to boast, but my abilities to understand and apply knowledge in mathematics, biology, chemistry and other sciences is rather exceptional for a university drop out. However, I assure you that I look at all sides of any issue that I tackle. And so it is with the fluoridation conundrum. I trust you will find the facts and science presented here to your satisfaction.

Before proceeding, I wish to start by asking if you know that the January 27 meeting had been recorded in almost its entirety. So, I went back to it and listened to all of it once again in light of your email. If you so wish, you could listen to it yourself here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnhIO2VL9HA.
Paul Connett IS a PhD, in Chemistry.
Gilles Parent IS a doctor, albeit in Naturopathic medicine.
I can only surmise that your mood of that evening made you miss the plethora of facts that were presented.

That these two professionals have developed expertise on fluoridation is astounding. That they have found that fluoridation is indefensible is even more astounding in the pro-fluoridation climate that permeates our western society. Do you want even more astounding? Over 3,700 professionals have signed a statement opposing fluoridation. All of their names are published here: http://www.fluoridealert.org/professionals.statement.html. Hundreds of them are Canadian. However, because of unwarranted and unreasonable pressures from their respective professional associations, most of them remain silent on the issue of fluoridation. The stifling of inquiry and objections on this subject is unfortunately censorship. It is used to block objections to a "sacred cow" attitude on this subject. That is both sad and very detrimental to advancement of knowledge in this matter that affects the health of millions of people now and will affect that of millions more in the future.

There is one part of the video near the beginning that deals with facts about the nature of fluoridation that puts the burden of responsibility directly on civic Councillors. In listening to the video again, I find that you interpreting this as an attack on Councillors is a bit disconcerting. If you look at the video objectively, with your growing experience as a Councillor, and being the reasonable and intelligent man that I believe that you are, I firmly believe that you will reassess that conclusion, seeing it as a bit of a stretch.

What Gilles Parent did was expose the inconsistencies of supporting fluoridation once you know certain data about the nature of fluoridation. So, he first gave those data. If your schedule does not allow you time to watch the video, here is a transcript of that very part on Councillors where Gilles Parent merely points out the following: “ If you are a City Councillor, you then have only one choice, if you don't want to act illegally. Declare that fluoridation chemicals are drugs. Otherwise, you are going to be adding a poison to the water and adding poison to the water, it's like poisoning people directly. That's illegal. Then a Councillor could face three serious legal problems with fluoridation.

Problem # 1: Health Canada has not approved fluoridation chemicals as drugs. It is illegal to administer unapproved drugs to patients.

Problem #2: As Councillors are not licenced as medical doctors, it is illegal for them to administer a drug.

Problem #3: Administering a drug to patients without their consent, beside being unapproved, contravenes Article 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

He then begins to complete this part of his presentation with the following shocking statements!

Which Health Authorities Claim Being Accountable For Fluoridation?

Clearly and surprisingly, he answers his own question with: NONE!

So he continues on this train of thought with:

It is not logical to accept the advice of those who accept no responsibility for these products:

Health Canada

Ontario Ministry of Health

Ontario Ministry of Environment

Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion

The question remains: Is anyone responsible? Well yes, but guess who? Municipalities are legally responsible:

for choosing fluoridation products

for adding fluoridation products.

And, pleading ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

That you interpret the above as "personal attacks on city councillor," your words, is a bit astonishing to me. I think there is room for you to revise that perception at this time.

Dr. Paul Connett's presentation was somewhat more enthusiastic and emotional, but he too did not intend his presentation to be an attack on municipal Councillors. I spoke to him at length about this and he found it difficult to accept that you would react that way. Let's move on.

I will just take a moment to remind you that one of the key reasons that I am so intense on this subject is because I was unknowingly fluoride poisoned in 1989. I only came to that conclusion after the weight of evidence that was presented to me in 2010 convinced me that this had really happened. I have lived most of my life in Ottawa . I was born here. The fact that City water was fluoridated since 1965 only added to the problem. Once poisoned by any fluoride substance, the human body reacts entirely as if it is highly allergic to it.

But it gets worse. For some people, their body begins to attack itself in an autoimmune way. Why? Here's my educated guess based on my acquired knowledge of human biology and chemistry. Once this fluoride enters the human body, the body is riddled with minute quantities of fluorine ions everywhere. Some of the fluorine element of the substance dissociates itself from the other substance(s) to which it is bound (chemical fact due to solubility) and is released as a fluorine ion. A fluorine ion is the single most chemically reactive element on earth. Your body identifies any part of itself that contains this ion as a foreign body, and attempts to destroy that part so "infected."

I became so ill that I eventually ended retired from work on a disability pension in 1999. However, by my own efforts, I was much later able to find a natural product that allowed me to begin healing starting in 2009 and I seem to be very slowly recovering from that debilitating illness. Of course, not everyone will react that way to fluoride substances in water, or even to fluoride substance poisoning. Some may be less sensitive, others more so and some may even die, all not knowing what is affecting them. Isn't time everyone knows the possible consequences of having fluoride substances in the water? Why should some of us, maybe millions of us, suffer the consequences of fluoridation, or even have the possibility of suffering from those consequences, for an outcome that does not exist?

Fluoridation was supposed to prevent tooth decay. Yet, after over 60 years of fluoridation in North America , this has not happened anywhere. It is now well known outside of the medical profession that tooth decay is not alleviated in any way by fluoridation. In fact, it causes a condition of the teeth called dental fluorosis in about 41% of children 12 to 16 years of age. Has the dental profession admitted to this? No! Why not. Part of it is through ignorance, and, maybe part of it because it has now become a "cash cow" that can provide revenues in the neighbourhood of $20,000 per mouth depending on the severity of the condition. That figure comes from Dental Surgeons who have done their own research on the subject. A Canadian Dental Surgeon, Dr. Hardy Limeback, PhD, DDS , Professor and Head, Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto is the one who personally gave me that figure in an email on February 28, 2011 .

Carole Clinch, a fluoridation researcher, has shared with us the following about Medical Officers of Health:

These individuals represent an organization that has a formal position [in] support [of] AWF [Artificial Water Fluoridation]. [This] is unique because, unlike tobacco, lead, smoking, asbestos, the PHS [Public Health Service] has taken a formal position promoting and supporting [it]. There are 3 fundamental problems with this:

1. the organization never did a review of the research - then or now. They are passing around a 3-4 page bibliography from one PHS unit to another, as a demonstration that they have "read" the literature, but the citations consist of [...] reviews by PHS, phone call interviews, and a [small] handful of primarily research.

2. the PHS organization filters information so that these individuals (MOHs) never see research which casts doubt on their position, leaving the MOHs in a state of profound ignorance.

3. the well-being of this organization depends on the public perception that they are doing a good job (after the SARS crisis their funding increased). Negative press could lead to a decrease in funding for this organization and a PR nightmare for this organization.

Please, consider this. When it comes to fluoride the weight of evidence which the MOH continuously refers to is not reliable given the fact that there is no incentive to publish research that is not industry friendly .”

Having looked at the data provided by the MOH, I have discovered what I'm sure you have read in my Cc: to you. In her email response of May 31, 2011 to my letter to Ms Gillian Connelly of the Ottawa Public Health office, I have found that 26 of the 67 citations are self-serving Government reviews that shed no light on any adverse health effects related to fluoridation. I have read a large number of the documents found in those reviews, and all of the ones in the Health Canada Panel Review on fluoridation. None of them either treat of adverse health effects nor substantiate on any claims of safety and effectiveness of the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid as a fluorinating substance in water fluoridation . Everyone of them completely misses the point that all fluorides are not alike. None of those documents expose the simple fact that all fluoride substances are poison to the human body, whether natural or man made.

Please take the time to re-read Gilles Parent's quote above, now that you have read this far and I'm sure you will see the validity of our claims for ending AWF.

On not being a doctor. Well, neither am I, but, I have taken the time to inform myself for the reasons stated above and because I am consumed with the knowledge that I may be able to help alleviate much of the suffering out there caused by this misguided and ineffective practice of artificial water fluoridation. It is surprisingly easy to understand all of the information available once you begin to look into it. I am reassured by your having read my email letters that you have absorbed some of what was said. I realize that you may not have as much time on your hands to delve into this subject as I do, but, isn't it worth your time to look into it a little more for yourself considering the urgency and dangerous nature of fluoridation?

All Medical Officers of Health have a stake in maintaining the status quo. They are ill informed about the current reality of the situation for similar reasons to yours. Time constraints and mandated duties to perform according to the dictates of their Association and their employment by the City. However, it goes quite a bit deeper than that, as noted in Carole Clinch's communication. So, I think it's time for you to take a personal stand on this problem by informing yourself independently. Once the truth comes out, maybe you'll feel much better for having been on the leading edge of making changes for the better from a solid, well informed position? I'm sure you'll even feel empowered to do better and greater things!

Some recent information on the subject not inOttawa's MOH files. Why?

1. HHS (Human Health Services, U.S.A. ) Assistant Secretary for Health, Dr. Howard Koh, says all infant formulas, either concentrated or ready-to-feed, already contain some fluoride and, when routinely mixed with fluoridated water, increase the risk of dental fluorosis (discolored teeth), in a video commentary published on Medscape.com, March 8, 2011

2. The Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends NO fluoride supplementation and advises, that "If children brush their teeth twice daily, they do not need fluoridated bottled water." Winter 2011

3. Commonly-consumed infant fruit juices contain fluoride, some at levels higher than recommended for pubic water supplies, according to research presented 3/17/2011 at the International Association for Dental Research annual meeting in San Diego

4. The Centers for Disease Control reports that over 41% of 12-15 years olds are afflicted with dental fluorosis due to fluoride over-exposure.

5. The Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water will lower safe water fluoride levels because of concerns that fluoride adversely affects bones and teeth. (January 2011)

6. “The prolonged ingestion of fluoride may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system,” concludes a review of studies by researchers Valdez-Jimenez, et al. published in Neurologia (June 2011).

7. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC U.S.A. ) has now confirmed the findings of many dental researchers that the mechanisms of fluoride's benefits are mainly topical [applied to the surface of the teeth], not systemic [by swallowing]. They conclude that fluoride has some benefits when applied topically, as in the form of toothpaste, but no significant benefits when ingested. Since swallowing fluoride is unnecessary and not effective for preventing tooth decay, it does not make sense that we are still fluoridating in our water supply, forcing millions of people to ingest it unknowingly or against their will.

8. Are you aware that the death of Terry Fox was caused by Osteosarcoma and that he lived in a water fluorinated community as a child? Are you aware that Wayne Gretsky stopped playing hockey because he suffers from Skeletal Fluorosis? Both have their origins in fluoridation. Terry's family has been silenced on the matter and Wayne has stayed silent. Why is that?

My apologies for being so long winded, but your response to mine has generated a tremendous amount of good will toward you and I wish you all the best in your quest to be the best municipal servant of the people that you can be. You deserve to be better informed than what is made available to you from the office of the MOH. They are not themselves being given all that they should receive on the subject of water fluoridation and I do not blame them for their ineptitude, however, the situation is in dire need of repair.

Would you consider asking the MOH for some significant, valid primary research documents on the possible adverse health effects specifically of the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid as a fluoridation agent (instead of the rubbish they sent us following my last request to them for information on May 18, 2011)? Maybe you could also later ask them, separately, if they are aware of the above 6 pieces of information, and if not, why not? Answers to these questions would be most helpful in understanding their ill-fated and ill-conceived support of fluoridation. I'd be interested in seeing their response.

I'm willing to bet you that you'll be either told to back off or that what you got is all that's available and all that you'll ever get. However, I am open to being surprised and amazed!

I have lot's of primary data on actual adverse health effects of sodium fluoride, but, as far as is known in this matter, the paucity of information on adverse health effects of hydrofluorosilicic acid is menacingly meager. If I recall, I have located only a few documents on adverse health effects of that specific acid's use in fluoridation (toxicity comparisons, dental fluorosis graph, some obscure and reviled research papers). Why do you think that is when this acid is so widely used? Even Health Canada has admitted to having none in their inventory of documents on fluoridation. Why is that? The CDA (Canadian Dental Association) and the ODA (Ontario Dental Association) have refused to respond to repeated requests for that information by other groups with whom I am in constant contact. That is unethical and not very reassuring from organizations that purport to be concerned about our health, yet they continue to promote and endorse this failed, unethical and wasteful practice.

Some final points.

Health Canada has just recently released its long awaited review on water fluoridation. We who oppose fluoridation on grounds of

    1. its known lack of effectiveness,
    2. known adverse health effects,
    3. adverse environmental impact,
    4. ethical considerations,
    5. the unnecessary financial burden it places on municipal budgets and family finances, and,
    6. on legal aspects
were extremely dismayed at the non response to these concerns by the final report.

The six members of the review panel opted to ignore all contrary research, journal articles and scientific data, some of them delivered to them unsolicited, contrary to their preconceived notion that fluoridation is safe and effective. It is not. The panelists did not have the qualifications to assess adverse health effects or any other of the 6 points mentioned above. In fact, they did not even look at what actual substance is used for water fluoridation but called it by the generic and misleading name of fluoride. As you now know, and as stated on the City's web site, the substance is called hydrofluorosilicic acid. If you know any chemistry at all, you can see that it is composed of hydrogen, fluorine and silicon elements ( H 2 SiF 6 ) combined together in a water like solution in a very toxic way as previously explained in one of my emails. More on this at some future time, if you wish.

Contrary to the CDC's statement made at the end of the last century, it is becoming more and more clear and obvious that fluoridation is one of the worst medical and health disasters of the twentieth century and possibly one of the most pervasive and monumental frauds ever perpetrated on a whole civilization. I know, that's a lot to swallow, but when valid and authentic data are looked at objectively and thoroughly concerning fluoridation, those are the only conclusions one can reach.

So, where do we go from here?
How about a meeting where you can view the most crucial information available on this critical subject?
Do you not want to do the right thing?
Do you want to be properly informed, not diverted from the truth by irrelevant information about this problem?

You may call me at home, 613-747-7157, at your convenience any, most any day between 10:30 AM and 10:00 PM for the next little while to meet with me and one other person. I am a peaceful man. There is nothing to fear, unless you fear the truth. Though I have an extremely busy schedule this week due to family matters that need tending to, I will make myself available to you to engage in further dialogue with you on fluoridation if you choose this week for a meeting.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

I remain, respectfully yours,


Richard Hudon
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, Ontario
K1J 8B5 — 613-747-7157
LETTER # 45
From: WL <email@domain.name>
To: Mark Taylor <Mark.Taylor@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 5:38 PM
Subject: Why is the City of Ottawa Putting Toxins into Our Water?


July 4, 2011

Councillor Mark Taylor
City Hall
110 Laurier Avenue W
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Taylor

As a resident of Ottawa for 25 years, I object most strenuously to the addition of the unregulated, untested, untreated, uncontrolled and unpurified, highly hazardous, toxic waste product that comes to us from the phosphate fertilizer industry.

This substance is called hydrofluorosilicic acid and it is used as a fluoridating agent in my tap water. It also contains other toxic waste products in it because it is not treated for their removal before being injected into our tap water.

In order for me not to ingest this toxin I have to resort to purchasing a water purification system at great cost to myself to remove the fluoride from my tap water or buy thousands of bottles of bottled water instead.

Why should I have to pay taxes for water treatment that is proven to be unsafe and whose water I do not want to drink because it contains undesirable chemical toxins in it and then have to spend more money to remove the toxic waste product that does not belong in that water in the first place?

Every statement made in this letter can be substantiated by currently available data from scientific research or from other reliable sources.

Please do not forward a response with the standard statement from either the Dental or the Medical Officer of Health in response to this letter. I am all too familiar with these statements that are full of misrepresentations of facts and misleading, unproven statements, not the least of which is the false claim that the WHO endorses water fluoridation.

Please help bring an end to the dumping of hydrofluorosilicic acid used for the fluoridation of our municipal water supply by putting forward a motion to Council for either a moratorium on this wasteful and unlawful practice until lawful, hard, verifiable and valid data are available about its benefits, or voting it out of existence because such valid data are non-existent.

Yours sincerely,


WL
Ottawa, Ontario.
K2B 8B3
Name and address details withheld by request
P.S. Please be advised that a large number of persons will be viewing the content of my letter to you and will be waiting to see if and how you respond to its content and the request for action.
A Response from Councillor Taylor's staff

From: Mark Taylor <Mark.Taylor@ottawa.ca>
To: WL <email@domain.name>
Cc: "Bird, Dan" <Dan.Bird@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 4:44 PM
Subject: RE: Why is the City of Ottawa Putting Toxins into Our Water

Hi Mr. L,

Thank you for e-mailing Councillor Mark Taylor with your comments on water fluoridation. I have given your e-mail to Councillor Taylor for his review and reply.

Regards,


Dan Bird
Special Assistant to the Councillor
Office of Councillor Mark Taylor, Bay Ward
Daniel.Bird@Ottawa.ca
BayWardLive.ca
Phone 613.580.2477 
Fax
613.580.2517
Ext. 26844 Address: 110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, ON, K1P 1J1
Councillor Taylor Responds

From: Mark Taylor <Mark.Taylor@ottawa.ca>
To: WL <email@domain.name>
Cc: "Levy, Isra" <Isra.Levy@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 4:44 PM
Subject: RE: Why is the City of Ottawa Putting Toxins into Our Water

Dear Mr. L,

Thank you for e-mailing me your comments on water fluoridation in Ottawa. I am pleased to reply.

I understand that you have already received a response from Ottawa’s Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Isra Levy, explaining why the City of Ottawa fluoridates its drinking water. I agree with Dr. Levy that Ottawa should continue to fluoridate its drinking water.

Once again, thank you for your e-mail.

Sincerely,

Mark Taylor
Ottawa City Councillor, Bay Ward
LETTER # 46
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: Councillor Tim Tierney < Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca >
Sent: Mon, July 11, 2011 11:29:09 AM
Subject: You mentioned you wanted some facts. Here's a beginning.


July 11, 2011


Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1


Dear Councillor Tierney

I hope this email finds you and your family in continued good health.

In my email of Monday, July 4, 2011, I mentioned that more facts and science would be forthcoming. Here is the first of these facts. More will follow as time passes.

Fluorosilicic acid is a synonym of hydrofluorosilicic acid ( H 2 SiF 6 ), among many others. Notice the other synonyms in section 1. We have often wonderd why tere are so many names for the same product with the same chemical formula. In fact, the formula is sometimes written as F 6 Si H 2 and  Si F 6 H 2 ; this tends to confuse the discussion of about this substance, but, that's the way it is with this substance.

Check out the potential Health Effects in section 3, Emergency Overview.

Please allow me to assure you that these are no longer just potential Health Effects, they are real and have happened to hundreds of thousands of people like me in Canada, and millions in the United States. Some of the adverse health effects are due to overfeed poisoning and most of these adverse health effects are simply due to chronic (long term) ingestion of low levels of this acid through artificial tap water fluoridation. This acid is also made present in all the foods and beverages we prepare and consume daily because the substances is in the water we use to prepare these foods and beverages. This acid is also made present in almost all processed foods, including pastries, canned goods and processed meats we buy at the grocery stores for the same reason.

Material Safety Data Sheet
Fluorosilicic Acid ( H 2 SiF 6 ) ACC# 11110

Section 1 - Chemical Product and Company Identification

MSDS Name: Fluorosilicic Acid
Catalog Numbers: A1481LB
Synonyms:
Hydrofluosilicic Acid; Hydrogen Hexafluorosilicate; Hydrosilicofluoric Acid.
Company Identification:

              Fisher Scientific
              1 Reagent Lane
              Fair Lawn, NJ 07410
For information, call:
201-796-7100
Emergency Number:
201-796-7100
For CHEMTREC assistance, call:
800-424-9300
For International CHEMTREC assistance, call:
703-527-3887

Section 2 - Composition, Information on Ingredients

CAS# Chemical Name Percent EINECS/ELINCS
7732-18-5 Water 74-76% 231-791-2
16961-83-4 FLUOROSILICIC ACID 24-35% 241-034-8

Section 3 - Hazards Identification

EMERGENCY OVERVIEW

Appearance: colorless liquid.
Danger! Corrosive. Causes eye and skin burns. Long-term exposure may cause bone and joint changes. May cause severe respiratory tract irritation with possible burns. May cause severe digestive tract irritation with possible burns.
Target Organs: Skeletal structures, bone.


Potential Health Effects
Eye: Causes eye burns. May cause chemical conjunctivitis and corneal damage.
Skin: Causes skin burns. May cause skin rash (in milder cases), and cold and clammy skin with cyanosis or pale color.
Ingestion: May cause severe and permanent damage to the digestive tract. Causes gastrointestinal tract burns. May cause perforation of the digestive tract. The toxicological properties of this substance have not been fully investigated. Ingestion of large amounts of fluoride may cause salivation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, fever, labored breathing. Inorganic fluorides can be harmful. Acute exposure to fluorine compounds can lead to digestive tract burns, and abdominal pain. Exposure to fluoride compounds can result in systemic toxic effects on the heart, liver, and kidneys. It may also deplete calcium levels in the body leading to hypocalcemia and death. Contains fluoride. Fluoride can reduce calcium levels leading to fatal hypocalcemia. May cause systemic effects. Ingestion may cause intense thirst, shock, convulsions, and possible death. Acute exposure to fluoride compounds may cause severe systemic toxicity including heart, liver, and kidney abnormalities.
Inhalation: Causes chemical burns to the respiratory tract. The toxicological properties of this substance have not been fully investigated. Aspiration may lead to pulmonary edema. May cause systemic effects.
Chronic: Chronic inhalation and ingestion may cause chronic fluoride poisoning (fluorosis) characterized by weight loss, weakness, anemia, brittle bones, and stiff joints. Effects may be delayed. Chronic exposure to fluoride compounds may cause systemic toxicity.

Section 4 - First Aid Measures

Eyes: Get medical aid immediately. Do NOT allow victim to rub eyes or keep eyes closed. Extensive irrigation with water is required (at least 30 minutes).
Skin: Get medical aid immediately. Flush skin with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes while removing contaminated clothing and shoes. Wash clothing before reuse. Destroy contaminated shoes.
Ingestion: Do not induce vomiting. If victim is conscious and alert, give 2-4 cupfuls of milk or water. Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. Get medical aid immediately.
Inhalation: Get medical aid immediately. Remove from exposure and move to fresh air immediately. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Do NOT use mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. If breathing has ceased apply artificial respiration using oxygen and a suitable mechanical device such as a bag and a mask.
Notes to Physician: Treat symptomatically and supportively.

Section 5 - Fire Fighting Measures

General Information: If breathing has ceased apply artificial respiration using oxygen and a suitable mechanical device such as a bag and a mask. As in any fire, wear a self-contained breathing apparatus in pressure-demand, MSHA/NIOSH (approved or equivalent), and full protective gear. During a fire, irritating and highly toxic gases may be generated by thermal decomposition or combustion. Use water spray to keep fire-exposed containers cool. Use extinguishing media appropriate to the surrounding fire. Substance is noncombustible. Vapors may be heavier than air. They can spread along the ground and collect in low or confined areas.
Extinguishing Media: Substance is noncombustible; use agent most appropriate to extinguish surrounding fire.
Flash Point: Not applicable.
Autoignition Temperature: Not applicable.
Explosion Limits, Lower:Not available.
Upper: Not available.
NFPA Rating: (estimated) Health: 3; Flammability: 0; Instability: 0

Section 6 - Accidental Release Measures

General Information: Use proper personal protective equipment as indicated in Section 8.
Spills/Leaks: Absorb spill with inert material (e.g. vermiculite, sand or earth), then place in suitable container. Avoid runoff into storm sewers and ditches which lead to waterways. Clean up spills immediately, observing precautions in the Protective Equipment section. Provide ventilation.

Section 7 - Handling and Storage

Handling: Wash thoroughly after handling. Use with adequate ventilation. Avoid contact with eyes, skin, and clothing. Keep container tightly closed. Do not get on skin or in eyes. Avoid ingestion and inhalation. Do not ingest or inhale. Use with adequate ventilation. Discard contaminated shoes.
Storage: Store in a tightly closed container. Store in a cool, dry, well-ventilated area away from incompatible substances. Corrosives area. Avoid storage in glass containers.

Section 8 - Exposure Controls, Personal Protection

Engineering Controls: Facilities storing or utilizing this material should be equipped with an eyewash facility and a safety shower. Use adequate ventilation to keep airborne concentrations low.
Exposure Limits

Chemical Name ACGIH NIOSH OSHA - Final PELs
Water none listed none listed none listed
FLUOROSILICIC ACID none listed none listed none listed

OSHA Vacated PELs: Water: No OSHA Vacated PELs are listed for this chemical. FLUOROSILICIC ACID: No OSHA Vacated PELs are listed for this chemical.
Personal Protective Equipment
Eyes: Wear appropriate protective eyeglasses or chemical safety goggles as described by OSHA's eye and face protection regulations in 29 CFR 1910.133 or European Standard EN166.
Skin: Wear appropriate protective gloves to prevent skin exposure.
Clothing: Wear appropriate protective clothing to prevent skin exposure.
Respirators: A respiratory protection program that meets OSHA's 29 CFR 1910.134 and ANSI Z88.2 requirements or European Standard EN 149 must be followed whenever workplace conditions warrant respirator use.

Respecfully yours,


Richard Hudon
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157
LETTER # 47
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Wed, July 13, 2011 7:07:17 AM
Subject: More about Recent Fluoridation Facts


July 13, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1


Dear Councillor Tierney

I hope this email finds you and your family in continued good health.

The establishment media will have to find a new tactic with which to ridicule those who oppose the fluoridation of water after a major new Scientific American report concluded that “Scientific attitudes toward fluoridation may be starting to shift” as
new evidence emerges of the poison's link to disorders affecting
    teeth,
    bones,
    the brain and
    the thyroid gland,
    as well as lowering IQ.
“Today almost 60 percent of the U.S. population drinks fluoridated water, including residents of 46 of the nation's 50 largest cities,” reports Scientific American's Dan Fagin. (2005)

The equivalent figure was at 43% for Canadians as of 2008, however, it continues to decline as more and more cities across Canada end the practice/policy/measure of artificial tap water fluoridation.

Fagin is an award-wining environmental reporter and Director of New York University's Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program.

“Outside the U.S., fluoridation has spread to Canada, the U.K., Australia, New Zealand and a few other countries. Critics of the practice have generally been dismissed as gadflies or zealots by mainstream researchers and public health agencies in those countries as well as the U.S. In other nations, however, water fluoridation is rare and controversial.”

In Europe, less than 3% of the population uses water fluoridation, and that, in Ireland and some limited parts of the UK.

Indeed, the zeitgeist for scoffing at those who spoke of the dangers of mass medicating the public against their will with fluoride was the deranged and paranoid character of General Ripper in the hit 1964 Peter Sellers movie Dr. Strangelove. Scoffing at the opponents of fluoridation is hardly a scientific way of proving one's case.

But that stereotype is quickly fading as serious scientific research uncovers proof that all the horror stories about sodium fluoride told down the decades are essentially true.

Please note that they write about sodium fluoride when referring to lab tests, the lesser of the two evils between it and hydrofluorosilicic acid.

The Scientific American study “Concluded that fluoride can subtly alter endocrine function, especially in the thyroid — the gland that produces hormones regulating growth and metabolism.”

There are research now showing that the chronic (long term) ingestion of fluoride substances calcifies the pineal gland over time. What is the significance of this:

The Function of the Pineal gland is as follows:

  • Causes Feeling of Sleepiness
  • Converts Nervous System Signals to Endocrine Signals
  • Regulates Endocrine Functions
  • Secretes the Hormone Melatonin

From http://biology.about.com/library/organs/brain/blpineal.htm

The report also notes that “a series of epidemiological studies in China have associated high fluoride exposures with lower IQ.”

“Epidemiological studies and tests on lab animals suggest that high fluoride exposure increases the risk of bone fracture, especially in vulnerable populations such as the elderly and diabetics,” writes Fagin.

Fagin interviewed Steven Levy, director of the Iowa Fluoride Study which tracked about 700 Iowa children for sixteen years. Nine-year-old “Iowa children who lived in communities where the water was fluoridated were 50 percent more likely to have mild fluorosis… than [nine-year-old] children living in nonfluoridated areas of the state,” writes Fagin.

The study adds to a growing literature of shocking scientific studies proving fluoride's link with all manner of health defects, even as governments in the west, including recently the UK, make plans to mass medicate the population against their will with this deadly toxin.

Sincerely yours


Richard Hudon, moderator for
Fluoridation-Free Ottawa
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157
http://ffo-olf.org/— ffo-olf@rogers.com
LETTER # 48
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Thu, July 14, 2011 1:43:12 PM
Subject: Health Canada report: a self-fulfilling prophecy.

July 14, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Tierney

I hope this email finds you and your family in continued good health. You may be asked to read this report by our MOH to bolster their position on holding the line on fluoridation. You need to resist the temptation to do so.

We, Canadians Opposed to Fluoridation (COF), are preparing a response that will completely debunk the falsehood of this tax funded waste of time and money! Below is just a summary of what we are putting together. Please read it and stay informed.

Health Canada report: a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Title: Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. Guideline Technical Document. Fluoride

After Health Canada had appointed a panel of six experts* , of which four were dentists, and three of the panelists were so obviously biased in favor of fluoridation, we held little hope that Health Canada would produce an objective inquiry into water fluoridation. Their preliminary report made available for public comment in 2009 looked very much like the self-fulfilling prophecy that we had expected.

In this, their dismissal of concerns on fluoride's impact on the brain, which was both superficial and incomplete, was based largely on the conclusion of the "panel of six" which imperiously had declared that the "weight of evidence" indicated that fluoride did not lower IQ. What "weight of evidence"? (This is a dumbing down phrase.) By 2009 there had been 23 studies published in China, India, Iran and Mexico that had found an association between lowered IQ and moderate exposure to fluoride and only one small study from NZ published in 1986 that had reported no association! Then there are over 100 animal studies indicating fluoride can enter and damage the brain, and three human fetal brain studies and two human behavioral studies.

Seems to us that the weight of evidence is rather contrary to their obviously biased assessment.

The same expert panel cautioned Health Canada not to rush to judgment on Bassin's study (Bassin, E.B., Wypij, D., Davis, R.B., and Mittleman, M.A. 2006. Age-specific fluoride exposure in drinking water and osteosarcoma (U.S.). Cancer Causes Control. 17(4):421-428.) that found young boys exposed to fluoridated water in their 6th to 8th years had a fivefold increase risk of succumbing to osteosarcoma by the age of 20. The Canadian "expert panel" chose to rely on a published letter by Bassin's thesis adviser Chester Douglass (known to be rabidly pro-fluoridation) claiming that his study to be published in the Summer 2006 would refute her thesis.

Following the advice of the expert panel of six, Health Canada continued to use this ploy in 2009, three years after Douglass had made the promise.

With huge reservations FAN along with other citizens and scientists in Canada and the U.S. dutifully submitted comments to Health Canada pointing out the scientific inadequacies of their 2009 draft review. On June 20, 2011, Health Canada released its final report (even though it is dated Dec 2010). Virtually all our concerns, and the references we submitted to support those concerns, were ignored.

Health Canada continues to delay judgment on osteosarcoma and is still waiting for the Douglass study, which is now 5 years overdue! It added none of the other references we submitted on this topic.

It still claimed that a "weight of evidence" analysis supports the claim that there is no relationship between moderate fluoride exposure and a lowering of IQ. It did not add a single reference on the IQ studies that we indicated they had missed in 2009, nor the ones that have appeared since.

Nor did they acknowledge the human fetal studies nor the human behavioral studies, nor the fact that there has been no attempt in Canada to repeat any of these studies.

No efforts whatsoever have been made to conduct any human health studies in any fluoridated community in Canada.

Canadian citizens and scientists are very much aware that local health officers in Canadian municipalities will be offering this Health Canada report in support of their claims that fluoridation is safe. These citizens are taking steps to get the truth out about this phony report. However, without the media's help this will be an uphill task and it will be up to local citizens to educate themselves on this issue and win communities over one municipality at a time. This effort would be greatly helped if more qualified people were to examine the primary literature instead of relying on the biased interpretations of Health Canada.

The key question remains: why are civil servants at Health Canada (and the health agencies in other fluoridated countries) determined to keep this practice going at all costs, including forsaking honest science and the public's health?

* The Expert Panel of Six:
Steven M. Levy, Iowa College of Dentistry; - known to be very pro-fluoridation
Christopher Clark, University of British Columbia; - known to be very pro-fluoridation
Robert Tardiff, University of Montreal;
Michael Levy, Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec;
Jayanth Kumar, New York State Department of Health; - known to be very pro-fluoridation
Albert Nantel, Institut National de Sante Publique du Québec.

Respectfully yours,

Richard Hudon
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157
http://ffo-olf.org/ffo-olf@rogers.com
LETTER # 49
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Tue, July 19, 2011 12:36:11 AM
Subject: More facts and knowledge.

July 19, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Tierney

Diane Sprules, our Ontario coordinator said: As one Peel Councillor, on our side now, told me - "We pay our MOH big bucks to be our medical adviser. Councillors like to think they are getting their money's worth. It takes a lot of convincing to go against their advice."

However, is it easier and better to let someone else think for you? Or is it just more expedient? Or what? Can we keep deferring to authorities that are ill informed and cover up their misinformartion by heaping more misinformation and detraction from the truth?

What if that information is biased in favor of a defective policy or practice? How will you ever know that this is happening if you do not do your own independent research? What if medical bureaucrats are misinformed by a higher bureaucracy that has a lot of face saving and reputations to protect?

This is the case with fluoridation. I mean, how do you back away from a statement that says: Fluoridation is one of the 10 greatest health policy achievements of the 20th century? Talk about digging yourself in! It has been known from the beginning that fluoridation is the single greatest fraud ever perpetrated on western civilization. And contrary to the previous statement, it is also one of the most disastrous health policies ever implemented during the 20th century.

Concurrent with the incremental implementation of fluoridation in western society, there has been a well documented incremental increase in obesity, cancers of all types, diabetes, arthritis, Fibromyalgia, hypothyroidism and numerous degenerative illnesses. This is not a coincidence. I am not saying that fluoridation is entirely responsible for all of these medical problems, but because the fluorine atom, as the most chemically reactive element known to man is a known scavenging bio-activator, it will contribute significantly to the aggravation if not uniquely responsible for these health problems. Also, of course, not everyone is equally sensitive to the effects of this bio-active element, because we are all individually endowed with our own level of health and wellness.

For the above reasons and because of our individual amount of ingestion of that element, the effects of the fluorine poisoning can take decades to develop for some, while for others it can be rather quickly depending on individually developed sensitivities, for whatever reasons. However, the fact remains that we are all going to suffer the consequences of ingesting this poison as those supplying it get rich at our expense. That's the bottom line. Follow the money! It's always about the bottom line of some uncaring industrialist or greedy businessman somewhere. They are not all greedy and uncaring: all it takes is a handful to ruin it for the rest of them. But it's almost unavoidable in our capitalist, free economy that some will be that way.

Until we awaken and react to put a stop to the foolishness of such pervasive but slow acting effects, adverse health effects from ingestion of fluoride substances will persist and haunt us into our twilight years and most will never know why unless we educate them. The time to do that has arrived. Let's do it. Together we are strong. Together we can bring about change for the better.

Dr. John Yamouyiannis covered the subject of biological damage from fluoride ingestion rather thoroughly in his book "Fluoride: The Aging Factor" published in three editions, 1983, 1986 and 1993. Fluoride substances age us prematurely because of their destructive effects on our DNA, RNA, cellular mitochondria destruction and destruction of over 50 essential enzymes in our body.

Please, let's work together to stop this madness as soon as possible. Plan the work: work the plan. Let me know when you want to meet with me to discuss a plan of action to bring an end to water fluoridation in Ottawa.

Respectfully yours,

Richard Hudon
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157
http://ffo-olf.org/ffo-olf@rogers.com
LETTER # 50
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Wed, July 20, 2011 6:32:53 PM
Subject: News: other cities end fluoridation! Why?

July 20, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Tierney

This victory comes from New Zealand, which unlike its Australian neighbor, still retains a vestige of democracy on this issue. On July 4, the Ruapehu District Council for the town of Taumarunui had this to say about their decision:

Council has decided to remove fluoridation from the Taumarunui Water Supply. There was considerable debate over the issue and Council heard from speakers of both perspectives. Factors in the decision included (but it's not an exhaustive record);

- The introduction of fluoridation into Taumarunui without a significant consultation process in the 1960s.
- The role of a Council in health outcomes when it does not fully understand the science, nor is able to, or willing to, monitor health outcomes. Council is not primarily a provider of health or dental products.
- The lack of choice possible by a blanket treatment amongst population today, many of whom desire choice.
- The lack of unequivocal statements of safety of fluoride to all people who do not have the choice not to ingest it.

This echoes the rationale for the decision by Calgary City Council earlier this year. They too looked at both sides (due diligence); did not feel it was their right to force medicine on the community members in uncontrollable doses and without their informed consent.

Then there was this one: A quiet victory : June 27, 2011:Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada original article here: http://northernprideml.com/2011/07/05/city-council-sticks-with-decision-to-cut-fluoride/

Then also in late June, Flin Flon finally voted to end fluoridation but did not wait for a plant refurbish to do so.
This is a report from an activist in Winnipeg:
"The city councils of Flin Flon, Manitoba, and Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, have voted to stop fluoridation in the last week or two. An interesting and encouraging feature of both is that Councillors were being pressured by provincial health officials but decided that the officials were wrong. Then the Councillors went ahead and did what they thought was the right thing to do.

This is important since Councillors have been very reluctant to accept that these officials responsible for protecting our health would be wrong or as uninformed as we have been telling them. Hopefully a big obstacle is being eroded away."

There you have it Tim.

What about you?
Will you take the plunge and decide to get in on the action and end this disastrous practice?
Will you do the right thing too?

Let me know when you decide to do so and we can work together to make it happen. It won't happen overnight, it will take a long time and a lot of work, but I'm sure you're not afraid of THAT! I'm sure you can apply your intellect and other abilities to best advantage by working for something as worthwhile as this. Just think of all the suffering you will be preventing by winning this kind of battle! It can even happen sooner than we think if we really work hard and smart at it.

Richard,
613-747-7157
LETTER # 51
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Mon, July 25, 2011 12:25:57 AM
Subject: Some facts from research and science.

July 25, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Tierney

Once again I wish this email letter finds you and your family in continued good health.

Neurotoxocity of fluoride substances:

    Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, PhD, Pharmacologist and Neurotoxicologist, Forsyth Dental Reasearch Center, was asked to do research on the effects of sodium fluoride on behavior using sodium fluoride and a computerized video behavioral analysis system.
    Video Interview Transcript:
      “The pattern that we saw is typically what we see with other neurotoxic agents that are well known to cause hyperactivity, or a memory problem, or an IQ problem. When I first presented the results of these studies, one of the individuals sitting in (the group) listening to the results said "Do you have any idea what you're saying?" and "You're telling us that we're reducing the IQ of children." And basically I said yes.”
    Research published in:
      Learning Disabilities, Attention Deficit and Behavior Disorders, source: Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 17(2), 1995, Toxicology Department, Forsyth Research Institute, Boston, MA, Journal Title: Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats.
    Within days of learning that her study was accepted for publication in 1995, Dr. Mullenix was fired from the Forsyth Center. She has received no grants since that time to continue her research.

    Here's a more recent one:
      "The prolonged ingestion of fluoride may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system," concludes a review of studies by researchers Valdez-Jimenez, et al. published in Neurologia (June 2011)
Fluoride and bone cancer (osteosarcoma) among young men:
    EXCERPT - pdf: Bassin E.B. (2001). Association Between Fluoride in Drinking Water During Growth and Development and the Incidence of Ostosarcoma for Children and Adolescents. Doctoral Thesis, Harvard School of Dental Medicine.
    FULL TEXT - pdf: Joseph S., Gadhia PK. (2000). Sister chromatid exchange frequency and chromosome aberrations in residents of fluoride endemic regions of South Gujarat. Fluoride 33: 154-158.
    FULL TEXT - html: Wu D, Wu Y. (1995). Micronucleus and Sister Chromatid Exchange Frequency in Endemic Fluorosis. Fluoride 28: 125-127.
    FULL TEXT - html: Gritsan N.P. (1993). Cytogenetic Effects of Gaseous Fluorides on Grain Crops. Fluoride 26: 23-32.
    FULL TEXT - pdf: Cohn P.D. (1992). A Brief Report On The Association Of Drinking Water Fluoridation And The Incidence of Osteosarcoma Among Young Males. New Jersey Department of Health: Environmental Health Service: 1- 17.
    FULL TEXT - pdf: Hoover R.N., et al. (1990). Time trends for bone and joint cancers and osteosarcomas in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. National Cancer Institute. In: DHHS (1991). Review of Fluoride Benefits and Risks. US Public Health Service. pp. F1-F7.
NEW EVIDENCE ON FLUORIDATION
    M. Diesendorf, J. Colquhoun, B.J. Spittle, D.N. Everingham and F.W. Clutterbuck, Existence of causal mechanisms by which fluoride damages bones: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Vol. 21 No. 2 1997, http://www.ffo-olf.org/NewEvidenceOnFluoridation.html
The Globe and Mail published this: Flouridation may not do much for cavities, Apr. 15, 2010 (Notice they spelled fluoridation incorrectly) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/flouridation-may-not-do-much-for-cavities/article1535873/

Our web site has a whole page devoted to adverse health effects of ingestion of fluoridation substances here: http://ffo-olf.org/HealthEffectsDatabase.html on that subject showing links to allergies, arthritis, bone diseases, brain diseases, cancers, kidney, pineal and thyroid gland disorders, and the list goes on and on...

There is also a whole web site devoted to adverse health effects from fluoride substance ingestion here:
    http://slweb.org/.
It has a whole bibliography of research papers, abstracts, scientific discoveries, medical documentation, on the effects of fluorinating medications, pesticides plus our foods and beverages.

If one does not look, one will not find.

Later today, Monday, July 25, 2011, Fluoridation-Free Ottawa will be publishing its commentary on their web site on the references sent to us by the Medical Officer of Health regarding fluoridation, for all to see...

I will be sending you a copy. Stay tuned. (Cc: sent. See http://ffo-olf.org/letterToMOH-DOH.html#15)

Respectfully yours,

Richard Hudon
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157
http://ffo-olf.org/ffo-olf@rogers.com
LETTER # 52
From: LF <email@domain.name>
To: Councillors Blais, Holmes and Taylor
Sent: July 22, 2011 5:20 PM
Subject: More re-consideration of Fluoridation in the USA.

July 22, 2011

Councillor Taylor
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Taylor

I believe that this is what we need to do here in Ottawa.

http://www.naturalnews.com/033086_water_fluoridation_Spring_Hill.html

I know where you stand on this issue Stephen and of course it is political because city staff respond to City Council not to residents.

City politicians will have to be involved and if it can't be resolved before 2014 it may have to be a referendum at the 2014 Municipal Elections like they did last year in Waterloo, Ontario.

Diane, I apologize for thinking you were the Chair of the Community and Protective Services Committee but I was sure I saw that nomination in the paper after the elections, can't believe everything you read in the papers. I will send future messages to Mark Taylor.

Councillor Mark Taylor, this is my first communication with you as the Chair of the Community and Protective Services Committee that also includes Public Health (according to the City website).

It is my belief that City support to the forced medication of all Ottawa residents, who drink municipal water, with the toxin fluoride is wrong.  The .7mg/L dose rate does not acknowledge the differing quantities of water consumed by different people i.e. sedentary vs active/labour workers nor age ie children vs adults.

You may be aware that other communities in Canada have rejected municipal water fluoridation.  If you doubt that fluoride is toxic just look at the warning on every toothpaste tube about its caution when used with children.

I'm keen to hear your position on this as it affects Public Health.

The City would also save some money but that's not the most important aspect for me.

Respectfully yours,


LF
Ottawa, K#A #A#
(613) phone #
Name and address details withheld by request
Dear Mr. F,

Thank you for e-mailing me with your comments on water fluoridation in Ottawa. I am pleased to reply.

Fluoride and the possible effects of adjusting its level in drinking water is one of the most intensely researched areas of public health with several hundred recent publications. A number of recent, major reviews have been commissioned by governments around the world to examine the potential for adverse health effects related to fluoride (Australia, United Kingdom, United States, and Canada). As part of our ongoing review, the Ottawa Public Health Department has reviewed these major studies. All concluded that water fluoridation is a safe and effective method of reducing decay at all stages of life. Despite claims to the contrary, they all confirmed that there is no credible scientific evidence to suggest adverse health effects related to water fluoridation.

Water fluoridation is endorsed by all reputable health organizations including the World Health Organization and Canada's national agency, Health Canada. In 2007, Health Canada released the Findings and Recommendations of the Fluoride Expert Panel, which are accessible at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/2008-fluoride-fluorure/index-eng.php. Further, specifically related to Ontario, the Ontario Medical Association ( OMA ) approved a policy that supports the addition of fluoride to drinking water following extensive research on the issue. “Ontario's doctors want their patients to know that the process of adding fluoride to our drinking water in Ontario has been and is safe” said Dr. MacLeod , President of the OMA . In spite of the overwhelming evidence, a great deal of anecdotal information continues to circulate. Detailed review of this information has shown that it is not based on scientific or thorough research and only selectively or partially examines the issue.

The City of Ottawa follows the Health Canada recommendations to establish a level of 0.7 mg/L as the optimal target concentration for fluoride in drinking water, which would prevent excessive intake of fluoride through multiple sources of exposure. Many natural water sources in the Ottawa area and some bottled waters, contain higher levels of fluoride than Ottawa's drinking water.

Fluoride exposure from drinking water generally represents 50% or less of the total daily exposure. Individuals who wish to limit their exposure to fluoride have opportunities to do so. In addition to avoiding tea that is high in natural fluoride, reverse osmosis filtration systems that further remove minerals, etc. from drinking water are readily available in the market place.

Only a small number of health-related programs are under the mandate of the Community and Protective Services Committee. Most are under the Board of Health chaired by Councillor Diane Holmes.

Once again, thank you for your e-mail.

Sincerely,

Mark Taylor Ottawa City Councillor, Bay Ward

This e-mail originates from the City of Ottawa e-mail system. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me at the telephone number shown above or by return e-mail and delete this communication and any copy immediately. Thank you.
Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville d'Ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son destinataire prévu est interdite. Si vous avez reçu le message par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser par téléphone (au numéro précité) ou par courriel, puis supprimer sans délai la version originale de la communication ainsi que toutes ses copies. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration.

LETTER # 53
From: LF <email@domain.name>
To: Councillor Taylor
Sent: Wed, July 27, 2011 3:50:57 PM
Subject: Re: More re-consideration of Fluoridation in the USA

Thank you for your reply Councillor Taylor,

If the optimal target concentration is approx 50% of our daily intake it would seem to make good sense for the City to provide the cleanest water possible and save some money at the same time.  And I wouldn't have to support the bottled water or reverse osmosis filtration companies.

I guess I have the right to not drink municipal water but it's expensive and not very GREEN if I drink bottled water, maybe City Hall doesn't care about that.

You may have heard that in the USA there's a case developing along the lines that municipal water fluoridation is racist because more non-whites live in poverty and hence are forced to drink municipal water because they can't afford to drink clean, toxin-free bottled/filtered water.

But, I'm still confused with your last paragraph...is water fluoridation within your Committee mandate or is it Councillor Holmes' with the Ottawa Board of Health?

As an aside, the Board of Health was not very easy to find within the city website.

LF
(613) phone #
Name and address details withheld by request
P.S. I have not received a reply from Councillor Holmes. Is her address at City Hall still... Diane.Holmes@ottawa.ca
A reply is received

Mr. F,

The policy on fluoridating Ottawa's water falls under the mandate of Ottawa Public Health. That is the correct e-mail address for Councillor Diane Holmes.

Regards,

Dan Bird
Special Assistant to the Councillor Office of Councillor Mark Taylor, Bay Ward
Daniel.Bird@Ottawa.ca BayWardLive .ca
Phone 613.580.2477   Fax 613.580.2517 Ext. 26844
Address 110 Laurier Avenue West  Ottawa, ON  K1P 1J1
LETTER # 54
From: LF <email@domain.name>
To: Councillor Taylor
Sent: Fri, July 29, 2011 4:32:07 PM
Subject: Re: More re-consideration of Fluoridation in the USA

Thank you for the reply Dan.

I'll try to keep this short but I'm still confused because, there are no elected officials at Ottawa Public Health hence they do not approve policy. The Board of Health (according to the Ottawa site) approves health policy but Public Health is still within the mandate of Community and Protective Services Committee (also according to the Ottawa site).

So, I'm back to my original question on who is responsible for the fluoridation of the Ottawa municipal water? And that may be the problem why this outdated and toxic process is still allowed in Ottawa. I realize that this process started well before the current council but there should be some oversight of Ottawa Public Health with respect to avoiding the effects of the status quo (because we've always done it, at least for the past two generations).

I have yet to hear from the Chair of the Board of Health, Councillor Holmes.

LF
613 ### ####
PS. Councillor Blais, I'll try to keep you in the loop in future communications.
LETTER # 55
From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Tierney, Tim" <Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca>
To: "Monette, Bob" <Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Mon, July 25, 2011 12:25:57 AM
Subject: Some facts from research and science.

August 2, 2011

Councillor Tim Tierney
Councillor Bob Monette
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Tierney,

I hope this email letter finds you, your family and the staff that work with you at city hall in good health.

On Tuesday, July 26, 2011, on behalf of Fluoridation-Free Ottawa, I sent you a copy of the letter and attachments that I sent to the Medical Officer of Health and his staff. The major attachment was an examination and rebuttal of the documentation that this office ostensibly uses to perpetuate the fantasy that water fluoridation is a healthy way of dealing with the problem of tooth decay when that problem really has its roots in poor nutrition.

Have you read the examination and commentary on the document of references and that of the statement from the Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Arlene King, that I received from our MOH (Medical Officer of Health).

Fluoridation-Free Ottawa has published the letter here: http://ffo-olf.org/letterToMOH-DOH.html#15 and all attendant documents are available on our web site. Have you read these documents for yourself or relied on the biased comments of others for your assessment? You really need to look at them for yourself. There is much in there for you to gain, and much to lose if you do not inform yourself from our side on this controversy.

Fluoridation-Free Ottawa would like to know if you are in favor of cessation of fluoridation, undecided, or against.

The documents have been studied by a consortium of numerous experts, specialists, researchers and activists across Canada who are not duped by extravagant and unsubstantiated claims as are made in the document filled with reviews, and inexact and misrepresented scientific studies that have nothing to do with the use of this toxic hydrofluorosilicic acid solution, H2SiF6. This acid is the exact substance used in Ottawa and in most Canadian Cities to contaminate our water supply in the false belief that it can prevent tooth decay. Because it's a belief backed by endorsements and high sounding pronouncements, not backed by hard evidence, does that make it a religion?

After more than 35 years of use in this City , there is not one shred of evidence that this contaminant has had any impact on caries reduction, much less prevention. There have been no research, no studies and no follow up for side effects done on this contaminant used for mass medication of our population that can be cited to prove that it has even made a dent in dental caries. Lack of data is no indication of lack of harm. Ignorance is no defense.

You'd think that after over 35 years some studies or research would have been done on the impact of this contaminant on our teeth and on our health. None have been done. This is dereliction of duty. The Ottawa Medical Office of Health has a duty of care in the administration of mass medication, especially one that is an actual contaminant banned by the EPA.

In 1957, a Supreme Court of Canada decision was rendered in a Forest Hill vs the City of Toronto that fluoridation is "compulsory preventive medication," that has a "special health purpose." That decision has never been overturned or contested, just merely spurned and ignored by health officials (medical bureaucrats)  and mostly innocent but complicit elected officials.

Fluoridation-Free Ottawa would like to know where you stand on cessation of fluoridation using this contaminant. Are you in favor of cessation of fluoridation, undecided, or against. Please let us know. Whatever your stand, it will be kept confidential until it's time for corrective actions to be taken. You will be informed of others who are in favor of cessation at that time so you may all join together to make it happen if the numbers are there. Let's move on.

No medical practitioner in his right mind would prescribe a medication to a patient they do not know, do not follow up on, or review any chronic side effects of the medication on that patient. Moreover, no medical practitioner is allowed to force medicate a patient without loosing their licence to practice medicine. Yet our medical bureaucrats (unelected health officials) are allowed to do both of these with impunity! How does that make any sense at all? We are not in a state of dangerous medical emergency, which is the only case where such actions might be tolerated or imposed, and even then, under very strict rules, regulations and guidelines.

The current MOH and his predecessors have done nothing to verify the efficacious application and any possible resulting adverse health effects of this contaminant used as medication in the water supply. Neither have Health Canada, the Canadian Dental Office of Health, the Ontario Medical Office of Health, the OMA, the CMA, the CDA nor the ODA. The burden of proof is theirs, but they have done no studies, research or investigations to prove that mass medication with this contaminant actually works to save a single tooth from decay and none to show that it does not cause any adverse health effects for everyone. Yet they all support and endorse the practice without proof.

In the administration of medication, safety is a prime concern, yet there have been neither Animal Studies (Toxicology Studies) nor Human Studies (Clinical Trials) to prove the claims that these products are "safe" so such claims of safety are FALSE and MISLEADING.

    In the absence of safety studies, any claims that these products are "safe" are not based on well-established scientific protocols.
    In the absence of safety studies, any claims that these products are "safe" are not based on legal definitions and requirements as defined in various Canadian laws and regulations.

Toxicology Studies and Clinical Trials are required by Health Canada regulations when any medicine is being administered. Yet “Health Canada does not regulate hexafluorosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride products, the actual products used in water fluoridation, which are allegedly used as a medical treatment to prevent dental disease.” Where is the proof that the contaminant used in fluoridation by Ottawa is safe for everyone. There is none.

A major inconsistency that everyone can see for themselves is that Health Canada promotes fluoridation in spite of the fact that it refuses to accept any responsibility for any ill effects from the use of this medication, and in contravention of its own rules and regulations on safety of use. The same is true for all of the other government bodies and alphabet organizations named above.

How can we really trust medical bureaucrats who parrot unsubstantiated claims of safety and effectiveness of other organizations when none of them have not even looked at or done any primary research to support their claims of effectiveness and safety?

If the nearly half million dollars spent by our City on this toxic waste contaminant was spent on nutrition education, the real key to reducing tooth decay, dental caries might be reduced by more than half over the next twelve years as the effects of fluoridation on bones and teeth begin to wear off.

Fluoride water does not prevent baby bottle tooth decay.
     
The highest rates of cavities are found in inner city children in fluoridated communities.

Kelly, M., Bruerd, B., Journal of public Health Dentistry, (1987) 47:94-97
Barnes, G.P. et al, Public Health report, (1992), 107:167-173
Von Burg, M.M., et al, Pediatric Nursing, (1995), 515-519
Shiboski, C.H., et al, Journal of public Health Dentistry, (2003), 63(1):38-46

If you can not be given hard evidence of safety and effectiveness, but only endorsements and empty but official sounding statements, then you should not be relying on the MOH for support of this failed practice of fluoridation with a proven contaminant.

Go ahead, specifically ask for primary research as proof that the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid is indeed safe for your health and effective in eliminating tooth decay . You have a duty and the right as an elected official representing your constituents to ask for this kind of specific information when doubt is raised about a municipal program as we are raising here.

If the concerns raised in this email letter, combined with the rebuttal of the documentation that was supplied to us by the office of the MOH do not raise any doubts in your mind, or does not elicit any reaction to begin the process of cessation of fluoridation, then you will need to be replaced.

Fluoridation-Free Ottawa would like to know if you are in favor of cessation of fluoridation, undecided, or against. Confidentiality is guaranteed.

A personal response either way is respectfully requested.

All the best and be well.


Richard Hudon, for
Fluoridation-Free Ottawa
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157 — http://ffo-olf.org/
P.S. I also have a problem with the fact that my taxes are used to purchase and dump a harmful contaminant that's a toxic poison into my tap water to support a failed cavity prevention program, yet I CAN NOT drink that tap water because of that contaminant, and, I have to turn around and purchase an alternate source of pure, clean water and other pure beverages for my very sustenance. What an insult!
A reply is received

From: "Monette, Bob" <Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca>
To: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
Sent: Wed, August 3, 2011 11:38:39 AM
Subject: RE: A water contaminant that needs to go

Dear Mr. Hudon,

This issue has not been raised at Council. Once it comes to the table I will look at all of the reports and make my decision then. At this time I have not made any decisions.

Regards,

Bob

Councillor Bob Monette/conseiller Bob Monette
Quartier Orléans Ward
Orléans: Celebrating 150 Years/ Orléans: 150 ans d'histoire
T: 613-580-2471
F: 613-580-9624
www.BobMonette.ca http://www.bobmonette.ca/
Response to his reply

From: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
To: "Monette, Bob" <Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Thu, August 4, 2011 12:54:16 AM
Subject: Re: A water contaminant that needs to go

August 7, 2011

Councillor Bob Monette

City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Councillor Monette,

Thank you for your response. I hope you and your family continue living in good health.

I appreciate your candor and understand, even empathize with, your hesitation. Our group is well aware that this issue has not been raised at Council. I trust it will not be until it has been clearly defined and understood as the wasteful, dangerous and useless practice that it is.

The only problem with "all of the reports" as mentioned in your response is that the MOH for Ottawa uses a "review" of reports for justification of their support for fluoridation that has no objective foundation on neither the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid nor on any adverse health effects of using this particular acid as a fluoridation agent.

The Ottawa MOH, along with all of the medical bureaucrats across the country, blindly use the word FLUORIDE without defining the actual substance used and refuse to supply any primary research on the safety and effectiveness of the use of this specific acid.

So again, I strongly suggest that you ask for specific primary research from our MOH, Dr. Levy, as proof that the use of hydrofluorosilicic acid is indeed safe for your health and effective in eliminating tooth decay. You have a duty and the right as an elected official representing your constituents to ask for this kind of specific information when doubt is raised about a municipal program as we are raising here.

I trust you will judge the matter fairly when confronted with all valid, objective evidence once you have fully taken stock of the whole situation.

Respectfully yours,

Richard Hudon, for
Fluoridation-Free Ottawa
1385 Matheson Rd
Ottawa, K1J 8B5
613-747-7157 - http://ffo-olf.org/
P.S. Feelings are getting strong on this subject. We have your best interest at heart. Yours is but one more answer out of 23.
LETTER # 56
From: SDL <email@domain.name>
Subject: One of your constituents
To: "Clark, Peter" Peter.Clark@ottawa.ca
Date: Wednesday, August 3, 2011, 2:15 PM

Greetings sir.

I am writing you to ask that you take a minute to consider discontinuing water fluoridation here in Ottawa.  As you many know, fluoride is a toxic chemical which has been used in rat poison that we are buying only to introduce it into our public drinking water supplies.  Just the thought of dumping poison into the water we drink flies in the face of reason and common sense.

There is an ever growing body of data that suggests harmful effects of fluoride exposure including the lowering of IQ and harmful thyroid consequences among other concerns like fluorosis (white marks on teeth due to fluoride exposure).  I do not want fluoride added to my drinking water.  At present, there is no way for me to opt out of this forced medication and I am forced to be exposed to this toxic chemical against my wishes all for the stated purpose of somehow limiting the number of cavities people get which, to my knowledge, is hardly a pressing health concern.

Additionally, if adding fluoride to the drinking water stopped dental cavities then why do we still have dental cavities?  When will this expensive endeavour pay off with the eradication of cavities?  Could we not think of something more pressing to do with the monies spent to buy and dump poison into our drinking water?  I, for one, am quite certain we can.

Thank you for your time.

SDL
Address
Ottawa, Ontario Canada.
Name and address details withheld by request
LETTER # 57
From: BH <email@domain.name>
Sent: Tue. April 5, 2011 8:15 AM
To: Hume, Peter E
Subject: Poisoning our water supply

Re sent

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Poisoning our water supply
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 08:57:37 -0500
From: BH <email@domain.name>
To: Peter Hume Peter.Hume@ottawa.ca

Hello Peter,

I am a resident in the Alta Vista ward and have been for most of my life.

I am writing today to ask for your help in bringing forward a motion to Council to eliminate fluoride from our water supply.

If you do some research you will quickly find that there is more proof that it is much more harmful to health than alleged by so called experts. There is no doubt that it is a poison and even to give the smallest nod to it's apparent ability to do anything good to teeth, it has to be applied topically. This can be achieved by using typical toothpaste or a visit to the dentist. It does not need to be ingested every time we need a drink of water.

The bigger issue also becomes the cumulative amount we ingest in all other liquid sources.

More and more legitimate studies are being done, not funded by that industry, that demonstrate that more harm is done than the questionable benefits.

Time to end this practice.

Regards,
A reply is received

From: "Hume, Peter E" Peter.Hume@ottawa.ca
To: BH <email@domain.name>
Date: Sun. May 15, 2011 8:38 PM
Subject: Poisoning our water supply
Thank you for this message and unfortunately I will not be bringing forward a motion to change any of the parameters of our water system.

Sincerely,

Peter Hume


LETTER # 58
From: BH <email@domain.name>
To: "Hume, Peter E" <Peter.Hume@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Wed, August 10, 2011 9:55:46 AM
Subject: Poisoning our water supply

Peter,

Thanks for your response. I'm sure there are more important things for you to be considering than questioning why a toxic substance continues to be added to our water supply.

A Councillor in Carleton Place appears to have a different opinion, he's probably on well water.
http://www.emcalmontecarletonplace.ca/20110804/editorials/Kudos+for+flouride+story

And if you have a few more minutes...
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/08/07/professional-perspectives-documentary.aspx

Sincerely,

BH
LETTER # 59a
From: L.F. <email@domain.name>
To: "Blais, Stephen" <Stephen.Blais@ottawa.ca>
Sent: Fri, August 12, 2011 3:56:45 PM
Subject: Outdoor Smoking Ban


Dear Councillor Blais:

I'm surprised that you are even suggesting this ban on this mostly seasonal activity when you support the continuous medication of your constituents with the toxin, fluoride, in our drinking water.

Have you looked at the warning on every tube of toothpaste w/fluoride with respect to its use on children? I do not understand your priorities?

It would be very inexpensive for you and your family to wear face mask air filters for occasional use as opposed to your recommendation for me to purchase a reverse osmosis filter to remove fluoride. It's not quite the same thing in that your air filter would still let in the 'good' components of the air while the reverse osmosis filter removes all the minerals, most of which are good for the human body.

And when we get to the 2012 Budget process we could save an additional $400,000.00 by doing the right thing for our children and rejecting the fluoridation of our drinking water. This process is a very inefficient use of our tax dollars even if there is a therapeutic effect because most of the treated water is used for washing, showering, flushing toilets, etc with the fluoride ending up in the river water.

I'm surprised the 'Ottawa Riverkeeper' does not have this in her sights for Ontario communities.

(Very few Quebec communities use this toxin and I doubt you could find any studies showing a statistical dental difference at the provincial level.)

Yours sincerely,


L.F.
LETTER # 59b
From: S.A.G. <email@domain.name>
To: "Steve Desroches" stevedesroches@ottawa.ca
Sent: August 19, 2011 8:52:14 PM EDT
Subject: FLUORIDE AND BONE CANCER IN CHILDREN


Councillor Steve Desroches
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

RE:  BONE CANCER IN CHILDREN & FLUORIDATED COMMUNITIES

Dear Councillor Desroches

It has been proven in epidemiological studies and through bone ash examinations that there is a greater prevalence of osteosarcoma (adolescent bone cancer) in fluoridated communities than in non-fluoridated communities.
Definition: Osteosarcoma is a cancerous (malignant) bone tumor that usually develops during the period of rapid growth that occurs in adolescence, as a teenager matures into an adult. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001650.htm .

Numerous studies show that fluoride can cause osteosarcoma. In 1997, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis testified before Congress that half a million people alive today could expect to die from a fluoride-related cancer unless the fluoridation of water is stopped. http://www.fluoride-osteosarcoma-law.com/fluoride_osteosarcoma.html

In 2001, the PhD dissertation produced by Elise Bassin of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine shows a strong link between fluoride and osteosarcoma. Her work indicates a statistically strong link between exposure to fluoride between the ages of six and eight (during which the ‘mid-childhood growth spurt' takes place) and the development of osteosarcoma in young boys. A commentary about her findings by Dr. Paul Connett is available here: http://ffo-olf.org/files/osteosarcomaBassinThesisConnett.pdf and Dr. Barry Groves, PhD also comments here: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/bassin-study.html .

How many children languishing at CHEO are currently victims of osteosarcoma, whether generated or aggravated by the ingested toxic fluoride product used in water fluoridation.

What are you prepared to do to stop this senseless suffering? Are you in favor of cessation of drugging the residents of Ottawa by artificial water fluoridation or are you undecided or opposed to such cessation?

I look forward to a personal response , not the standard text from the Medical Officer of Health.  Surely, if you have children or grandchildren, you will care enough about their future to do something about this situation.

Respectfully,


S.A.G.
Street Address
Nepean, ON
K2J #A#
TEL: 613-###-###
cc: Jim Watson, Mayor of Ottawa
LETTER # 60
From: DE, KO, RH, MB, BH, SAG <email@domain.name>
DE To: marianne.wilkinson@ottawa.ca
KO To: Allan.Hubley@ottawa.ca
RH To: Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca
MB To: Peter.Clark@ottawa.ca
      plus individually each of the 22 other Councillors
BH To: Rick.Chiarelli@ottawa.ca
      plus Cc: all Councillors
SAG To: Rick.Chiarelli@ottawa.ca
DE Cc: Richard Hudon <rich.hudon@rogers.com>
Sent: Thu, August 18, 2011 7:22:38 AM
Subject: Water Fluoridation


Marianne Wilkinson City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1

Dear Ms. Wilkinson,

It has been proven in epidemiological studies and through bone ash examinations that there is a greater prevalence of osteosarcoma (adolescent bone cancer) in fluoridated communities than in non-fluoridated communities.

Definition: Osteosarcoma is a cancerous (malignant) bone tumor that usually develops during the period of rapid growth that occurs in adolescence, as a teenager matures into an adult. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001650.htm.

Numerous studies show that fluoride can cause osteosarcoma. In 1997, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis testified before Congress that half a million people alive today could expect to die from a fluoride-related cancer unless the fluoridation of water is stopped. http://www.fluoride-osteosarcoma-law.com/fluoride_osteosarcoma.html

In 2001, the PhD dissertation produced by Elise Bassin of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine shows a strong link between fluoride and osteosarcoma. Her work indicates a statistically strong link between exposure to fluoride between the ages of six and eight (during which the ‘mid-childhood growth spurt' takes place) and the development of osteosarcoma in young boys. A commentary about her findings by Dr. Paul Connett is available here: http://ffo-olf.org/files/osteosarcomaBassinThesisConnett.pdf and Dr. Barry Groves, PhD also comments here: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/bassin-study.html.

How many children languishing at CHEO are currently victims of osteosarcoma, whether generated or aggravated by the ingested toxic fluoride product used in water fluoridation.

What are you prepared to do to stop this senseless suffering? Are you in favor of cessation of drugging the residents of Ottawa by artificial water fluoridation or are you undecided or opposed to such cessation?

A personal response is respectfully requested, not the standard text from the Medical Officer of Health.

DE
Kanata, ON
K2T #A#
<email@domain.name>
Name and address details withheld by request
From: jan.harder@rogers.blackberry.net
To: BH <email@domain.name>; Isra Levy
Cc: John Steinbachs ; April Duffy
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: Bone Cancer in Children - An easy one for your Councillor

No there hasn't!
Jan
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
From: McRae, Maria
To: BH <email@domain.name>;
Cc: Levy, Isra ; Burry, Aaron ; Steinbachs, John ; Harder, Jan
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 12:35 PM
Subject: RE: Bone Cancer in Children - An easy one for your Councillor

Thanks for your letter B. 

It looks like other form letters I am receiving.

I will ask the Medical Officer of Health to follow-up.

With regards,

Maria McRae
River Ward City Councillor
Conseillère, quartier Rivière
City of Ottawa/Ville d'Ottawa
110, avenue Laurier Avenue West/ouest
Ottawa, Ontario  K1P 1J1
Tel./tél.: (613) 580-2486
Fax/Téléc: (613) 580-2526
MariaMcRae.ca
Twitter: @CouncillorMcRae
River Ward - home to more than 49,000!
Quartier Rivière – Le choix de plus de 49 000 résidents!

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
P Veuillez penser à l'environnement avant d'imprimer le présent du courriel.


From: Shad Qadri
To: BH <email@domain.name>;
Sent: Mon, August 22, 2011 11:18:51 AM
Subject: RE: Bone Cancer in Children - An easy one for your Councillor

Good Afternoon Mr. H,

Thank you for your email.  In September 2009, the City of Ottawa reduced the target level of fluoride in drinking water to 0.70 mg/L in response to the new level recommended by Health Canada. These changes were made under the direction of the Medical Officer of Health.

The possible effects of fluoride in drinking water is one of the most intensely researched areas of public health with several hundred recent publications. A number of recent, major reviews have been commissioned by governments around the world to examine the potential for adverse health effects related to fluoride (Australia, United Kingdom, United States, and Canada). As part of our ongoing review, the Ottawa Public Health Department has reviewed these major studies. All concluded that water fluoridation is a safe and effective method of reducing tooth decay at all stages of life.

Despite claims to the contrary, the studies confirm that there is no credible scientific evidence to suggest adverse health effects related to water fluoridation.

Water fluoridation is endorsed by reputable health organizations throughout the world including the World Health Organization and Canada's national agency, Health Canada.

The City of Ottawa maintains a concentration of 0.70 mg/L (ppm) of fluoride in the drinking water provided to the central distribution system. Occasionally the City stops adding fluoride for short periods during equipment maintenance and inform the Medical Officer of Health and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment of the interruption. When the interruption is finished we resume adding fluoride at the same level. The City does not lower or raise the concentration to make up for interruptions in supply.

There are two levels of fluoride monitoring in Ottawa. The fluoride level is continuously monitored at both water treatment plants using on-line analyzers. In addition, the fluoride concentration is tested throughout in the water distribution system by certified operators. The results of the monitoring program are reviewed by Ottawa Public Health. The Ontario Ministry of the Environment suggests a concentration range of 0.50 – 0.80 mg/L with a Maximum Acceptable Concentration (MAC) of 1.50 mg/L for fluoride in drinking water. If the level exceeds 1.50 mg/L it would be investigated immediately and reported to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) and the Medical Officer of Health.

I am sharing your concerns with Dr. Isra Levy the Medical Officer of Health for the City should he wish to comment further.

Sincerely,

Shad

Shad Qadri
Councillor, Serving the community of Stittsville within the City of Ottawa
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1
Tel: 613-580-2476; Fax: 613-580-2516
Email: Shad.Qadri@ottawa.ca
Web: www.shadqadri.com
or visit www.shadqadri.com.

Waste is a RESOURCE - Produce energy! Modern solutions don't include ancient burial practices, email Shad or visit www.shadqadri.com

From: "Egli, Keith" < Keith.Egli@ottawa.ca>
Date: 20 August, 2011 2:04:11 PM EDT
To: BM <email@domain.name>;
Cc: "Levy, Isra" < Isra.Levy@ottawa.ca>, "Aitken, Marissa" < Marissa.Aitken@ottawa.ca>
Subject:Re: Bone Cancer in Children

Mr. B

This issue is beyond my area of expertise. I note your comment regarding our health department but I am copying our Officer of Health for assistance. I have every confidence in his ability answer your questions.

Keith Egli
Councillor, Ward 9 Knoxdale-Merivale
Tel: 613-580-2479
Would you like to subscribe to Councillor Keith Egli's Ward 9 Newsletter? Email us at ward9@ottawa.ca

From:"Monette, Bob" < Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca >
Date:August 20, 2011 12:25:21 AM EDT
To:MB <email@domain.name>;
Cc:"Mohammed, Rafeena" < Rafeena.Mohammed@ottawa.ca >
Subject: RE: Bone Cancer in Children

Thank you for your comments I will wait till this issue arises at Council before making any decision.

Bon

Councillor Bob Monette/conseiller Bob Monette
Quartier Orléans Ward
Orléans: Celebrating 150 Years/ Orléans: 150 ans d'histoire 
T: 613-580-2471 F: 613-580-9624 www.BobMonette.ca
This e-mail originates from the City of Ottawa e-mail system. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me at the telephone number shown above or by return e-mail and delete this communication and any copy immediately. Thank you.
Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville d'Ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son destinataire prévu est interdite. Si vous avez reçu le message par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser par téléphone (au numéro précité) ou par courriel, puis supprimer sans délai la version originale de la communication ainsi que toutes ses copies. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration.

From:"Dare, Jane" < Jane.Dare@ottawa.ca >
Date:August 26, 2011 4:55:02 PM EDT
To:< buechler.matthew@gmail.com >
Cc:"Watson, Jim (Mayor)" < Jim.Watson@ottawa.ca >, "McRae, Maria" < Maria.McRae@ottawa.ca >, "Harder, Jan" < Jan.Harder@ottawa.ca >, "Levy, Isra" < Isra.Levy@ottawa.ca >
Subject: Fluoridation of Ottawa's Drinking Water

Mr. B,

On behalf of the Medical Officer of Health, I would like to thank you for your comments on the fluoridation of community drinking water.

Sincerely,

Jane Dare
Ottawa Public Health

This e-mail originates from the City of Ottawa e-mail system. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me at the telephone number shown above or by return e-mail and delete this communication and any copy immediately. Thank you.
Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville d'Ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son destinataire prévu est interdite. Si vous avez reçu le message par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser par téléphone (au numéro précité) ou par courriel, puis supprimer sans délai la version originale de la communication ainsi que toutes ses copies. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration.