Dear All,

I am going to be out of town for a few days, thus this is probably a good moment to share a few more letters with you that have been sent to President Bok. This bulletin is rather long but you can take your time reading it because the next FAN bulletin will not reach you until Sept 8.

Meanwhile, the letter sent in by Dr. Sam Epstein is attracting many of you to express your support for it with your own short personal note. If you have not done so yet, the simple directions are below.

While I am away, we are expecting a story to break in Washington, DC, so please keep your eyes on the home page: http://www.FluorideAction.net Talking of our home page some of you are reporting intermittent difficulties opening it up from “aol.com” accounts. Would you please let me know if this is happening to you.

It has been nearly two weeks since Dr. Albert Burgstahler sent in his letter signed by 12 Harvard graduates and he has yet to hear a peep from President Bok - not even an acknowledgment. Nor have over 300 others who have sent letters in. I am sure Harvard alums get a quicker response when they are donating money!

Below we have printed letters from the following:

Thank you for everything you are trying to do on this.

Paul Connett

———————————————————————-

please complete the following with your personal details, then cut and paste into an email to  and bcc me at
:

————————————————————–

Dear President Bok,

I am an environmental engineer, aand I am appalled to learn that you do not feel it important to uphold the truth, especially when human health is at risk. To exonerate Chester Douglass after he misrepresented the findings from his federally-funded study on fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma.

My best friend’s son had osteosarcoma, and barley survived without an arm bone no less. Her son was given fluoride supplements and fluoridated water. There is currently a class action lawsuit against the distributors of the fluoride. If those entities counter the lawsuit saying Harvard University was telling us there was no link to bone cancer, then you could get pulled in as a co-plaintiff. Saying this is very likely in this sue-happy country, I hope that in the future when your University alters the truth, they are held responsible.

Sincerely

Ms. Laura Yonkers

West Palm Beach Florida

———————————————————-

Dear President Bok:

I have been a student of the fluoridation issue for more than 40 years. During this time I have experienced at all levels of government the lies and deception necessary to protect the greatest  fraud ever perpetrated on the American people, fluoridation.

None is greater than Harvard’s deliberate exoneration of the actions of your Dr. Chester Douglass who knowingly prevaricated when he stated to the National Research Council that Elise Bassin’s research showed no relationship between fluoridated water and bone cancer in young boys.

The public is awaiting the “veritas” on this issue. Please do not disappoint us.

Sincerely,

Patricia Moreell

Boca Raton, Florida

——————————————

Dear President Bok,

As a third generation alumnus of Harvard University (HBS ‘86) and son of a Harvard professor, I was dismayed but not surprised by the University’s decision to exonerate without explanation Professor Chester Douglas from well documented charges that he allowed his financial relationships with the dental industry to affect his academic behavior.  I have been concerned for many years that Harvard places financial affairs first and scientific integrity second.  This decision reinforces both my own, and the public perception as demonstrated by recent Fox news stories, that Harvard protects its own before it protects the public good.

There is more here than just one improperly handled graduate thesis and one dental school professor profiting from his research sponsors.  For over fifty years, the federal public health agencies have sold poor research supported by money from Colgate and Procter & Gamble as public policy.  Harvard University has no direct responsibility for righting, or even participating, in this debate.  However, by exonerating Professor Douglas without public explanation, you have now taken sides.

Now that you are involved, I request that you arrange an independent inquiry to investigate the facts of the case.  If the previous inquiry fits the definition of complete and independent, then I request that you release its detailed findings.  Lacking such public release of the facts of the case, I do not believe that the University is acting in the best interests of science, of the public, or of truth.

I support the letter copied below, sent by the highly knowledgeable Dr. Albert Burgstahler.  Like Dr. Burgstahler and his colleagues, I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Jonathan A. Bower

Wayland, MA

——————————————————————————————————————–

Dr. Dear President Bok,

I am an alumnus of the class of ‘54, Harvard College, and a retired Professor of

Philosophy (SUNY) specializing in Ethics. My life long interest has been in the

area of the medical ethics as it applies to medical research. I currently oversee

research reporting for Breast Cancer Choices, Inc., so I am aware of the nuances

of how research studies impact standard of care and public policy.

Ever since graduation from the college, for over fifty years now, I have praised

Harvard for helping me learn both how to look for the truth and present that

truth to others in ways that wouldn’t convey the notion that truth was secondary

to another agenda.

I would like to add my name to list of Harvard alums deeply disturbed by the

Professor Douglass scandal wherin he appears to misrepresent the association

between fluoridation and osteosarcoma in young boys.

I and my colleagues fully support the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and are

distressed that their findings have been treated so shabbily.

I urge you to reopen the investigation with a new committee less influenced by

those invested in the profit-centered dental products community. I feel Harvard’s

reputation is at stake and nothing less than convening a new committee will

provide a fresh look at the evidence.

I look forward to hearing from you about future plans to remove the dark cloud

that currently hangs over the whole Douglass debacle.

Sincerely,

Earl Foley, ‘54

Earl Foley

Chief Research Editor

Breast Cancer Choices, Inc

A Nonprofit Organization

P.O. Box 1567

Amagansett, NY 11930

631.239.8367

——————————————————————————————————-

Dear President Bok,

Please give some deserved thought to the apparent whitewash that Harvard has given to serious charges concerning Harvard professor Chester Douglass.  Dr. Douglass’ clear misrepresentation of fluoride/cancer findings in Dr. Bassin’s thesis, which he originally endorsed, is not something that should be justified or ignored, especially in view of his very possible conflicts of interest with Colgate.

My organization deals with environmental health concerns, and we are committed to getting out information about the science of fluoride toxicity, even at low levels, to professionals who ought to know this information, and do not.  I am therefore especially disturbed that Harvard appears to be more interested in protecting a Harvard professor, than in promoting this potentially significant health information to mainstream medical science.

Your wife has written several wonderful books on ethics, and I am aware of her books on Lying and Secrets.  Perhaps these two books should be distributed to the members of the committee that has chosen to exonerate Dr. Douglass - and to Dr. Douglass.

I would suggest a convening of an outside, fully independent panel, to look into this very serious matter in a transparent and comprehensive way, which would include the input of EWG.  Please save Harvard’s scientific and ethical integrity.

Respectfully,

Deborah E. Moore, PhD

Executive Director, Second Look

P.O. Box 20915

Worcester, MA 01602

ph: (508) 755-7352

fx:  (508) 755-1535

———————————————————————–

6) From Dr. David Egilman (graduate of Harvard School of Public Health)

Dear President Bok,

The truth is the foundation of academia. As an alumni of the School of Public Health, I am very concerned by the charge that a Harvard Professor, Chester Douglass, misrepresented important research findings from his federally-funded study on fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma…(online letter at   http://actionstudio.org/?go=2413 )

Dr. David Egilman

Attleboro MA

Dear President Bok,

As a dental researcher and epidemiologist, I am disappointed and disgusted by the fact that Harvard Professor Chester Douglass misrepresented very important research findings from a federally-funded study on fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma. Efforts by well-known scientists, including a Nobel-laureate, to educate the public on fluoride’s known toxicity are thwarted by Dr. Douglass’ blatant unprofessional academic conduct.

What is even more egregious is Harvard’s very brief, and completely inadequate, response on August 15, 2006.

This statement - coming 13 months after the ethics complaint was filed - provides no explanation at all to justify the University’s position that Douglass did not “intentionally” misrepresent the research. Nor does it explain why the investigators failed to make contact with EWG and seek direct testimony on the matter.

In my view, neither Douglass’s behavior nor the University’s response, lives up to your ancient motto “veritas.”

Perhaps its new motto should be “Protectus gluteus maximus”.

Sincerely

Dr. John Short

Niwot CO

—————————————————–

Dear President Bok,

My name is Robert Kopitzke, statistician, with some 35 years of industrial experience as a senior statistician. I have read and understood Dr. Bassin’s thesis, the article of which Dr. Bassin is a coauthor in the May 2006 issue of the peer reviewed journal “Cancer Causes and Control”, and Dr. Douglass’ report to NIH citing Dr. Bassin’s thesis as support for his claim to NIH that there is no connection between water fluoridation and osteosarcoma. Dr. Bassin’s work and Dr. Douglass’ report are at direct odds with each other, and I do not understand how these can be reconciled.

Although I am not a Harvard graduate I support the Harvard Alumni letter.

Robert Kopitzke,

Fort Collins, CO

——————————————————–

Dear President Bok

My name is Dr Elvira Dommisse, a former research scientist with Crop & Food Research Institute of New Zealand, Lincoln, NZ . Although I am not a Harvard graduate, I am very concerned about the issue outlined in the letter below. I fully endorse the letter sent to you by Dr. Albert Burgstahler and other Harvard graduates.

I think it is very important for its own credibility that Harvard is seen as a university upholding the highest standards of scientific integrity.  Compromising this integrity does it no favours.

I urge you to take this matter seriously and deal with it accordingly.

Yours sincerely

Dr Elvira Dommisse,  BSc(Hons), Otago; PhD (Biotechnology), Canterbury

——————————————————-

Dear President Bok,

We seem to be living in a time in America when the norm for scientists is to succumb to the lures of market forces with no harm to their careers. Scandals taint our most prestigeous scientific journals and institutions, and our children who we send to these  institutions for a superior education learn not only the methods and practices of scientists, but their biases and prices. We must ask ourselves if American science and scientific institutions deserve our continued support and investment under these circumstances. Half a loaf of science is worse than no loaf at all.

Now we have the sad case of Professor Chester Douglass, chair of the Department of Dental Public Health Policy and Epidemiology in the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. Like most public health dentists, professor Douglas is firmly committed to water fluoridation as a public health measure. But lo and behold, when his own graduate student’s research found a statistical correlation with fluoridation and osteosarcoma in boys, Professor Douglass refused to release the study, and continues to do so today, even after several more years of review and improved methodolical rigor.

What reason could he have for suppressing this study? Could it be related to funding he has received from a major manufacturer of fluoridated toothpaste? Why should this study languish on a dark shelf when the recent National Academies’ exhaustive review of water fluoridation found that Americans are getting far too much fluoride considering the dire health risks presented by these high doses.

Professor Douglass should release this study. If he doesn’t agree with it, there are forums where he may state his concerns. But if he cannot get past his prejudices so this startling but well-conceived research can be seen and debated in the halls of academe, then Harvard’s inability to require its professors to stand down when they have a conflict of interest and not hamper research progress, is in itself scandalous.

I have been privileged to work closely with two distinguished Harvard professors, Dr. Mark Hegsted, and Dr.Walter Willett. I consider them two of the greatest contributors to the field of nutrition research. In fact, Dr. Willett wrote an endorsement for my recent book on nutrition (”What to Eat; The Ten Things You Really Need to Know to Eat Well and Be Healthy,” McGraw-Hill, 2006). It pains me to think that the standard of excellence I have come to expect of Harvard has been sullied in this case.

Bad science–which is more dogma than discovery, is ruinous for all sciences. I urge you to correct this injustice to the researcher and to all of us whose children may suffer the consequences of the risks she has identified.

Sincerely,

Luise Light, MS, Ed.D.

Bellows Falls, VT.

——————————————————————————

Dear President Bok,

In this time it is more than troubling to once again witness the prostitution of our institutions of higher learning by money from government and industry. Science has nothing if it does not have integrity. A dental professor being protected by Harvard, in my opinion, has been trying to hide

a link between ingested fluoride and a rare form of bone cancer in young males.

I have reviewed the evidence and it is clear that on repeated occasions Chester Douglass misrepresented Elise Bassin’s thesis findings and his own.

This would never have been known if the Environmental Working Group (EWG) had not blown the whistle on his behavior. Now to make matters even worse Harvard has completely vindicated Douglass in a four paragraph letter that did not address even one of the charges.

You might wonder how this could be since they never even discussed the mounting evidence of misconduct with EWG. Perhaps it was the clairvoyant panel of peers that was able to divine his intentions from the stars. In reality it appears they simply took his word for it. He forgot. Or my dog

ate the homework. Are we to believe that everyone at Harvard is comfortable with this ethical smirch on their school’s name?

Your motto “veritas” would appear to be out of date considering the recent actions at this once highly regarded University. Since it was under your guidance that Harvard’s integrity has been damaged, the corrective action falls upon your shoulders. The only way that you can repair the damage that I can see is to reopen the inquiry and this time put together a balanced panel of people who still believe in that old worn out motto.

They should start their new inquiry by inviting EWG to present the considerable evidence of Douglass’ misrepresentations. You should make it a point to instruct them to find out the truth of the matter and not try to save the paper. A one page response to a well documented charge the

equivalent of theft of government funds and murder of innocent children is simply not adequate. Or you can always change your motto.

Sincerely,

David Kennedy, DDS

San Diego, CA

davidkennedy-dds@cox.net

————————————————————

Dear President Bok:

I’m not a graduate from Harvard. I’m professor of Evolutionary Biology at the National University of Cordoba (Argentina), which is one of the oldest universities in Latin America. I’m a recipient of the Alternative Nobel Prize in Stockholm (Sweden), and president of FUNAM, a very well known grass roots environmental organization. Being a professor of several universities, within and ouside my country, I have discussed with my students the tragedy of having “good science” and “bad science”. The Chester Douglass Affair has added a new category:  ”empty science”.

I work in the forest with isolated Mbya Guarani indigenous people and with poor citizen’s groups in the most polluted regions of Argentina. I have been working in quite different countries and cultures all over the world, from Uganda and Kenya in Central Africa to Bangalore in India; from Guatemala in Central America to South Korea in Asia. Most of the time I have worked with very poor budgets, often provided by my own pocket. I learned about the importance of being self reliant and independent.

I have met respected people like Jacques Yves Cousteau, Alice Stewart and Nelson Mandela. I chaired ”Voice of the Children Campaign” where I worked with Wangare Mathai, Nobel Peace Prize 2005. I discussed in open fora with people from not so respected companies (like VIPs from Barrick Gold). I can do that, and I continue to be myself. I have the internal and external freedom for contacting everybody everywhere. I take with me my achievements and failures, my open mind (as open as possible), and my strong scientific arguments. These arguments come from independent and good science.

Harvard has prestige, institutional prestige (for me it was a great honour to stay at the Faculty Club, near the room where Albert Einstein once was). Such institutional prestige has been built by people, by practitioners of good science and good administration. A researcher or academic manager can receive financial support from Colgate, United Nations or Christian Dior. This is not a crime. The crime begins when such researcher or academic manager has a scientific role vis-a-vis public or private sponsor’s interests. In such cases there are not clear and transparent borders.

The Chester Douglass Affair is a tragedy not only for the University but also for the whole academic world. Even for me. Our most valuable treasure is the method we have for searching for the truth, while respecting ethics. This is our unsigned contract with society, with our kids, with the future.

The Chester Douglass Affair is affecting not only Harvard University’s prestige, but also the work of coherent and independent academic people all over the world. When a member of any University destroys good science, and his University does not condemn it, bad science is the winner. When a serious health issue is involved, like finding a linkage between fluoride in drinking water and osteosarcoma, bad science turns into a killer science. I know my statement may seem too harsh, but this scandal is too harsh.

I’m from a country located far from Harvard, but I share the spirit of all academic people and researchers who try to discover the truth, and to transmit such truth to common citizens. You can offer to your University, to your country and to the World a clear example of Justice, or a clear example of complicity. I have happy and vivid memories of my stay at Harvard University. For me Harvard was at that time (in the 1990s), seemed a cathedral of wisdom. If the University cannot succeed in washing its institutional brain and heart, I will lose a little bit of pride in my memories of my stay at Harvard.

I apologize for my English. Deliberately I decided not to use the speller. It’s a wild letter from a wild biologist.

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Raul Montenegro, Biologist.

Alternative Nobel Prize 2004 (Stockolm, Sweden).

Professor of Evolutionary Biology at the National University of Cordoba (Argentina).

President of FUNAM (Environment Defense Foundation).

—————————————————————————————