Those who have not been to our web page in the last 24 hours, please do so. Go to http://www.FluorideAction.net and you will find a picture of what Harvard’s new shield might look like if they fail to live up to its motto: “veritas” on the Douglass affair (see also FAN’s statement on this).

The first shield is the one that Harvard has had for 370 years since its foundation in 1636. This shield says that Harvard protects the truth (veritas). The second shield says it protects its “own”, even those professors who twist the truth in the interest of their financial benefactors, whether they be from government or industry.

In short, the second shield says that “Science is for Sale.” Mind you, if the news of the Douglass whitewash gets around to enough people, that second shield won’t be worth much for those financial benefactors any way!

Why is the battle for scientific integrity at Harvard ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL BATTLE for us all? In my view, the reason is very clear.  The whole nonsense of fluoridation has persisted for over 50 years precisely because of a lack of scientific integrity on this matter on behalf of its key proponents - the American Dental Association (ADA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the other arms of the US Public Health Service, whose dishonest - but “respectable” - influence, in turn, spreads like a giant octopus to every State Health Department in the land,  as well as the Health agencies in the other countries, which have foolishly followed America’s policy on this matter.

The battle for scientific integrity at Harvard is certainly crucial in terms of its symbolic value, but it is also crucial from the point of view of the public health. If Bassin is right then every day fluoridation continues the lives of a number (and any number equal, or greater than one, is too many) young boys are being threatened by this foolish practice.  Chris Bryson, the author of the groundbreaking book, “The Fluoride Deception,” makes this point very clearly in the letter he sent to President Bok yesterday (see below).

To get its real shield back, Harvard has to come clean on the Douglass affair. Those in charge have to explain how someone could possibly do something “unintentionally” for 4 whole years! 4 years is a long time to fool yourself, let alone others, as to the significance of what Bassin found. And before Douglass is allowed to compound the crime and obfuscate the “misrepresentation” issue with his claims of “new” studies, he must be forced to produce the data for those “new” studies so that the substance of this matter can be examined by independent scientists not beholden to either Harvard or the practice of fluoridation.

That is why it is heartening to see how many letters are flooding into President Bok on this matter from around the country and from around the world. But we have yet to hear a single peep from President Bok after two weeks, so clearly we need more letters - both powerful individual ones and many, many online letters.

Have you sent in yours yet? Here are the details again.

You can either send in your own personal letter to President Bok (please bcc me at  
) or send in the online letter at http://actionstudio.org/?go=2413

1) in your first sentence you explain who you are (this personalizes your message);
2) put any higher degree after your surname;
3) if you are writing from a country other than US, include your country name after your town, and put “Other” for your state.

4) copy and save your letter before submitting, and

5) if you have problems submitting your message send the copied version directly to President Bok at

Many, many thanks.

Paul Connett

PS Let us know what you think of Harvard’s new shield? http://www.FluorideAction.net

——————————————–
Subject: Regarding Chester Douglass

To:

Dear Sir  – I have a three and a half year old boy. I’m also a working journalist and the author of The Fluoride Deception (Seven Stories Press 2004, 2006). Recent published research by Harvard Medical School’s Elise Bassin identifies a relationship between bone cancer in young boys and fluoridated water. 

Why did Harvard Medical School professor Chester Douglass cite her work to the National Research Council in asserting there is no such relationship?  Why did your ethics committee exonerate his action? And why is the report of that committee being kept from the public?  

Bassin’s findings address a matter of grave medical importance.  Bone cancer is a painful and frequently fatal disease. We have been fluoridating water for more than half a century.  It now appears quite likely that a great number of children have been killed by this public “health” practice.

By his deception Professor Douglass brings shame and disgrace to the practice of science and medicine.  In standing by as such malpractice is swept under the rug, it seems you do much the same to your college and office.

Harvard had an opportunity to call Douglass to account for his actions, and for in effect perpetuating what is quite possibly a murderous public policy.  

Sir, what will you tell the children?

Sincerely, Christopher  Bryson