Fluoride Free
Australia

The History of Fluoridation in Australia

1950. The NSW branch of the Australian Dental Association, the Faculty of Dentistry Sydney University, and the Sydney Institute of Dental research, submitted a report to the Australian Government urging that fluoridation begin.

1953. The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC ) assisted in a study of children at the Hopewood Home, Bowral, NSW. The children were fed a healthy diet, and used water with no measurable amount of fluoride. 78% had perfect teeth. The average DMFT was 0.58.

In spite of the Hopewood study the NHMRC first endorses fluoridation. Its task is to advise the Australian government on all matters concerning health of people. Its recommendation was based on the advice of the Dental Research Advisory Committee. It was, nevertheless, conditional:

• That a large proportion of the public desire and that no large proportion oppose, water fluoridation.

• That the need be established for that community, including that the total daily intake be determined.

Promoters claimed this to be an unequivocal endorsement. Deliberations were held in secret, the same as the 1979 Hamer Committee. Even the conditional endorsement was based on the uncompleted US studies. As at 1982 the NHMRC had conducted no research in Australia, but simply kept repeating its original endorsement.

1957. Melbourne: Professor Sir Arthur Amies, Dean of the Faculty of Dental Science, asked Dr Philip Sutton to check the numerical data published from the original fluoridation trials and the scientific methods used in them. He discovered so many errors that to record them he was forced to write a 72-page monograph Fluoridation: Errors and Omissions in Experimental Trials (Melbourne University Press, 1959). He published a second 142-page edition in 1960 which answered the criticisms of the first edition, showing that the criticisms were false. This book remains scientifically unchallenged.

Sir Arthur Amies, "The passion to regulate the lives of others is deep-seated in many individuals. When this is based on political expediency, it is bad, and when it is inspired by an idealism which wishes to inflict benefits on others, it can be dangerous."

1962. Australia: a 9 year old boy experienced gastric haemorrhages, requiring removal of a large portion of the stomach. After his return home he suffered another, requiring removal of part of the upper bowel. Several hours before the second incident he had taken a 1 milligram fluoride tablet.

1963. The New Zealand case of Lewis v Lower Hutt City begins, eventually going to the Privy Council, who make the opposite decision to that of the Canadian Supreme Court and rule that Local Councils can put anything they like in the water, including medication, so long as the water remains "wholesome".

The Australian case of Kelberg in 1964 and the Scottish case of McColl in 1983 ruled that fluoridation was unlawful on exactly the same wording, as the Candian Supreme Court had already done. The latter cases "distinguished" Lewis which, in the circumstances, was a polite way of saying the judgment was plainly wrong.

1964. The case of Kelberg v City of Sale in Victoria Australia, adopts the Canadian interpretation, rejecting the New Zealand approach. Australian States simply pass legislation instead.

1968. Tasmanian Inquiry into fluoridation supports fluoridation

Tasmania bans local councils form holding referenda on fluoridation, making it compulsory. (In 1995 the lower House passes a Bill making it illegal to hold public meetings to discuss fluoridation, which was overturned by the upper House.)

1972. Sydney, Australia. Dental promoters claim a significant improvement in tooth decay due to fluoridation. The actual figures, when broken down, show that there was 60% improvement in tooth decay from 1961 to 1967. Sydney was fluoridated in 1968. By 1972 the improvement was only another 2%, with a backslide of 1% until 1970. That is, the rate of improvement declined after fluoridation commenced. Dental promoters then selected children from the affluent northern Sydney, with less than average tooth decay, to claim a better improvement than reality. (A similar technique appears to have been used in Grand Rapids).

1973. Australia NSW Health Department Policy, stated in the Medical Journal of Australia "It has been conventional practice to give a fluoride supplement during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy at a rate of 1.5mg of fluoride per day." In fact the US FDA had banned fluoride tablets for pregnant women in 1966.

During the 1973 Victorian election (Australia) Premier Hamer undertakes to honour the wishes of Ballarat people over fluoridation.

1978: the Council conducted an opinion poll on fluoridation: 2922 against, 186 for. The Victorian Government ordered the Ballarat Water Commission to proceed with fluoridation regardless. A petition to the Queen ensued, signed by 12,500 people, about 1/3 of the adult population. Unions put a black ban on the fluoridation plant installation. Due to an unexpected by-election, Hamer agreed to suspend work and establish an independent inquiry. (See 1979) However of the 3 commissioners appointed without consultation, one was past president of the Victorian branch of the Australian Medical Association, who supported fluoridation. (VD Pleuckaham. The other two were DM Myers, and ALG Rees.) It undertook to hold public meetings: they never did. All proceedings were in secret. The Ballarat people made many in depth submissions on the science involved. One went to Europe at his own expense to gather information. Not one reference could be found in the report. The petition was sent from the Queen back to the Australian Governor-General, who then referred it to the Victorian Governor. It then went back to the Victorian Premier's department. The people of Ballarat were then informed that it did not meet standing Orders and hence could not be tabled before parliament. On 11 November 1980 it was presented unaltered to the House by the member for Ballarat North. It was not debated. On 11 Feb 1981 it was sent to the relevant Minister. The union bans continued in the face of this deliberate political manoeuvring by Hamer.

1967. Fluoride was introduced to the Wyong Shire public water supply in April 1967 following debate by the Council between 1963 and 1966. The vote for the final decision was FOR - 5 Councillors: AGAINST- 5 Councillors. This meant that the Shire President (Mayor) had to use his casting vote which ultimately approved fluoridation for Wyong. The community was not consulted and therefore did not have the opportunity to reject fluoridation.

1977. Melbourne, Australia, fluoridated February 1977. Over 100 statutory declarations were filed by persons suffering adverse health effects whenever they drank the water. The Victorian "Hamer" Commission of Inquiry (1979-1980) claimed no adverse health effects had been observed. The ADA state: "No evidence is available to support the claim that the use of dietary fluoride supplements by adults will provide dental benefits in adults." 1978. Bacchus Marsh Australia. Promoters stated that the percentage of children with no decay had increased (1963-1978) by 15.8% due to fluoridation. In fact the total number had increased from 2 to 3 individuals (Bacchus Marsh population was approx 5000).

1979. John Yiammouyannis visits Australia. Proponents are invited to publicly debate with him. NHMRC put up their expert at a meeting at Canberra University, 27 June. The debate was publicly described as a complete walkover for Yiammouyannis.

The Official Physician's Desk Reference (Australia): Fluoride supplements should not be administered to persons who are hypersensitive to fluoride. Side effects [include] Eczema, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, skin rashes, gastro-intestinal upsets, headache, nausea, and vomiting.

1979-1980. The "Hamer" Commission of Inquiry sits in Victoria Australia. To support its predetermined outcome it repeats lies and deceptions throughout its report, and omits much adverse evidence put before it. A detailed analysis of this, referencing original documents "quoted" by the Commission, is available in Fluoridation: Poison on Tap by G Walker, Magenta Press, Melbourne, 1982.

100 statutory declarations, some with doctor's certificates were provided regarding hypersensitivity. All stated the symptoms cleared up upon using distilled water for drinking and cooking. The Commission never called in for medical testing. One woman was just out of Melbourne public hospital and had been given a wristband warning nurses not to give fluoridated water to the patient. Evidence was given that doctors had no hesitation in ordering unfluoridated water to be supplied from the dispensary for that purpose.

Brisbane. A boy ingested between 4 and 6 fluoride tablets. The cause of death was listed as fluoride poisoning. Queensland Health Administration claimed that he had swallowed half a bottle – 92 tablets. No evidence was forthcoming to substantiate this. The mother said 6; his stomach had 4. (pumped at hospital) Reported 3 Nov 1979. The hospital doctors refused to believe the cause was fluoride poisoning because they were unaware that fluoride had a lethal dose (in spite of being used as rat poison for years) No inquest was ever held. Letter from boy's mother.

Dental fluorosis in Queensland (Australia) school children. March 1979, Dr G Smith took up a position of dentist at Prosperine Hospital, Queensland. He encountered a large number of children with dental fluorosis. He reported this to Brisbane authorities who told him to forget about it. He did not, but had the information published in Victoria. He was immediately asked to resign. Two investigators were sent. They were both employed by the school dental service, one taught the female dental therapists to apply fluoride .They advised they would do no more than classify the degrees of fluorosis. Smith advised that this was a superficial and cynical approach to the issue which he would not be associated with. He was classified as "unco-operative" in justifying the request for his resignation. The level of fluorosis was only marginally below the level considered a "public health problem". The equipment was obsolete, no one monitored the fluoride levels. Subsequent tests averaged 0.93 ppm: the recommended level was 0.6. (hot climate, high water consumption) School dental therapists were giving fluoride treatments and recommending fluoride tablets. They had never been taught about fluorosis. Two of the children were suffering from chizzola maculae: a possible symptom of fluoride poisoning resembling small bruises. The dentist were totally unqualified to address this, which is in the area a of clinical pharmacology and toxicology. Smith officially requested they be properly examined. No response to this request was received.

1982. By this time fluoridation is compulsory in all Australian military camps.

1984. Gosford City Council held community consultation polls regarding addition of fluoride to the public drinking water supply. The community rejected fluoridation by a majority of 65%.

1991. Gosford City Council held community consultation polls regarding addition of fluoride to the public drinking water supply. The community again rejected fluoridation by a majority of 70%.

1995. Tasmania attempts to ban public meetings held to discuss fluoridation. The Bill passes the Lower House but is rejected by the Upper House.

1996. Philip RN Sutton publishes The Greatest Fraud Fluoridation.

Spencer et al publish their Australian study showing insignificant difference in lifetime dental figures as between fluoridated and unfluoridated communities. (0.12-0.3 dmfs. Refer Brunelle and Carlos, 1990, above)

2002. There is a major push from the US to compulsorily fluoridate its own communities. A similar push to recover lost ground begins in Australia, New Zealand, and the UK.

2004. Once again fluoridation of the Gosford City water supply was debated in the Council. This followed the release of a 2-page document by the State Department of Health relating to the poor dental health of 0-5 year olds in Gosford City area. The report sought to prey on the emotions of the public, but to date no information about how thorough the study was, whether the children's dietary habits were analysed and whether it was a double-blind randomised trial has been forthcoming from the State Department of Health.
It was a five all vote with the Mayor holding the casting vote and rejecting fluoridation.

20th October Bellingen Shire defeats proposal to fluoridate their town water supplies, 71% opposed.

Although not legally binding on NSW Health, the result sends a clear message to this department that there is strong community opposition to fluoridation.

"We are now calling on Bellingen Shire Council to not just forward the results onto the Director General of NSW Health, but to pass a motion in support of this clear community decision to reject fluoridation", said spokesman Anton Ingarfield

Offer accepted from Mid North Coast Area Health Service by Coffs Harbour City Council for subsidies to fluoridate water supply. No community consultation took place prior to the decision.

June/October: Two rescission motions lodged by Cr Smithers and supported by Cr Joass, Cr Rhoades and Cr Hogbin were defeated despite a F.I.N.D. petition with 3500 signatures being presented to Council. The petition called for community consultation and a referendum on fluoridation.

August: F.I.N.D. presents renowned Australian anti fluoridation campaigner, Dr Mark Diesendorf to the Coffs Harbour community for a 2 hour lecture and debate.

October: F.I.N.D. petition also presented to local MP Andrew Fraser along with a letter seeking his support for a referendum. Letter also sent to Robyn Kruk requesting community consultation and a binding referendum under Section 6A of the Fluoridation Act of NSW.

In their report Armfield and Spencer from the Dental School in Adelaide concluded that, "The effect of consumption of nonpublic water on permanent caries experience was not significant." This same result is borne out in many other comparative regions of fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities and in a number of these cases the non-fluoridated communities had better dental health e.g. Northern Sydney (fluoridated) vs. Mid North Coast (non-fluoridated) ref. Page 11 The Child Dental Health Survey, NSW 2000.

2005. AUGUST NSW PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY INTO DENTAL SERVICES IN NEW SOUTH WALES - Public Hearing

A public hearing was conducted in Port Macquarie by the NSW Parliamentary Upper House Standing Committee. 3 Witnesses, including Cr Lisa Intemann of Port Macquarie and Lyn James of Kempsey, gave evidence while several speakers also had input including representatives from the Central Coast and Coffs Harbour.

The overwhelming theme from the hearing was the widespread opposition to the fluoridation of public water supplies on the Mid North Coast of NSW and the fact there was no community consultation despite 70% of the community being opposed to it.

Cr Intemann is still making more submissions to the Inquiry at the request of the Committee.

Gippsland Water, as directed by the Department of Human Services, notified all residents that our water supply will be artificially fluoridated.