FAN Bulletin 891

November 11, 2007

Dear All,

In haste.

I didn’t expect to get out another bulletin before I left today, but I couldn’t pass over this disgusting letter which attempts to fix the NHMRC position on fluoridation. This was sent to me by David McRae. It is a letter from the director of the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) to Professor Warwick Anderson, Chief Executive Officer, National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), telling him in no uncertain terms that he expects the NHMRC to issue a statement of support for fluoridation. The letter is dated Feb 20 2007, and refers to a meeting in September 2006 where NHMRC members had said that they would be issuing a statement supporting fluoridation. All of this before the “scientific review” of the literature which led to the recent statement from the NHMRC (see FAN bulletin 890)!

So this is how they conduct “scientific reviews” in Australia: First you make up your minds about your position, and then you do the “research” that supports that position. It is called “working backwards from the desired result” or “ the corruption of science.”

What is more important for the NHMRC doing honest science or supporting our friends in high places?

But still the key question remains: how was the NHMRC able to satisfy these pressures and also deal with the damning evidence presented in the NRC(2006) review?

And the other question remains: who is driving this policy in Australia? And why?

Paul Connett
——————–

Smoking gun from Australia

Professor Warwick Anderson,
Chief Executive Officer,
National Health and medical Research Council,
GPO 1421,
CANBERRA, ACT 2601

Dear Professor Anderson

Fluoridation Standards

The Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) is a forum for the promotion of the health of the public as well as being a professional resource for public health personnel. The PHAA has a strong interest in Oral Health.

The PHAA notes that while State and Territorial governments have made significant commitments recently to progress water fluoridation in Australia, the lack of a current statement of support for water fluoridation by NHMRC is a substantial threat to this work.

Groups opposed to water fluoridation currently refer to the NHMRC response:

“The NH and MRC does not have a separate formal statement about fluoridation of the water supplies” (1) as evidence of a lack of support for water fluoridation.

At the 162 session of the NHMRC in September 2006, members supported the publication of the NHMRC’s support of water fluoridation. PHAA acknowledges that recent NHMRC selective tender for the conduct of a systematic review of fluorides and health in Australia will be the first step in addressing this responsibility for raising the standard of individual and public health.

The Public Health Association of Australia is keen to see this work expedited and would be happy to contribute towards the development of a statement supporting water fluoridation in order to help reduce the confusion around this issue. Equally we would be happy to participate in a public workshop around this issue, as discussed in the 162 session.

We would be happy to talk this issue over with you or your staff should you think that would be helpful. I can be contacted on (02) 62852373 or at plaut@phaa.net.au.

Yours sincerely,

Pieta-Ray Laut,
Executive Director
20 February 2007

For reference 1 see footnote on the original letter.