The following press release speaks for itself.  Please try to attend one or both of these events.  To draw a good crowd at City Hall tomorrow is particularly important.    

                                                         Dr. Paul Connett


May 15, 2011

Dr. Paul Connett, internationally-acclaimed environmentalist, chemistry professor  and founder/director of the Fluoride Action Network, will visit Austin this coming Tuesday, May 17 and Wednesday, May 18 for two don


  1. Nice to get Paul as he has the title and the book. Might get more PR exposure.
    When they design the process it is hard to get a level playing field. At least they are playing the game. Good luck.

  2. It would have been nice if you had informed us that the live Channel 6 coverage would not start until 10 a.m. because from 9 to 10 is executive session. All the people that showed up in person I guess will have to just wait around one hour while waiting for the public session to begin.

    Did you know this?

  3. Of course not, or I would have informed you. 

    Actually, I’m not sure what you’re talking about.  There was no executive session  that I know of.  When we arrived at 9, another meeting (with refreshments) was  still  going on it that room, not quite over, so everybody milled around in the hall for 10 or 15 minutes having a wonderful time until the doors opened for us.  I don’t know what Channel 6 did or didn’t do, but the event was a great success with the large turnout of enthusiastic supporters we were hoping for. 

  4. This was a great meeting:  Paul and Griffin (Dr. Griffin Cole) creamed the opposition!  Whether and what comes of it remains to be seen.

  5. I tuned in to Channel 6 on my computer and there was a bulletin board with messages. One of the messages said the Committee would meet in executive session from 9:00 a.m. to 10:a.m. and then the debate/meeting with Dr. Connett would begin at 10:a.m.

    There was also a bulletin board notice on Channel 6 that said the meeting could be listened to live on KAZI FM radio here in Austin. So I tried to listen there but it was music, not the meeting.

    I tried to Channel 6 again at about 9:20 and it was live shots of the almost empty House chamber at the Capitol with a session about to begin and people starting to take their seats.

    I guess Channel 6 never did not cover the meeting.

    I am glad the meeting went well and I’m sure Dr. Connett won the debate. I hope the City will take action.

    I just am disappointed I could not listen or watch live and could not find any report on the meeting until viewing these messages.

  6. The best time spent is often outside the meeting chambers. The chance to speak freely and share ideas is perfect. The chambers do not allow personal interaction. Sometimes another room with TV is provided where we can openly comment is much more fruitful in some ways. It is also good to have large numbers inside the chambers to openly support our message. Nothing like big numbers to get attention.
    Sometimes we get the curve balls by design as little surprises to try to get us off track. They do control the process so use it to protect their policy. They want us to go away or at least to be ignored or seen as wacko jobs because the paid experts say so.
    Most dentists know so little of the actual science and only speak of their beliefs and repeat the same CDC talking points like robot parrots. That is what the ADA tells them to do. defend fluoridation whatever it takes.

  7. I’ve just learned more from the Channel 6 station manager. There were some issues with live-streaming it which I won’t go
    into here, but it was successfully recorded and will be re-broadcatst in full at at 7 p.m. tonight  from the Channel 6 website.  Within a few days, it will be archived on the same website under the “City Council” tab, for replay on demand.  I hope you’ll take the opportunity to watch. 

  8. Jim, I one hundred percent agree with everything you just said.

    Was the room filled full with people? Was there a good turnout?

    I wanted to be there but could not. I was looking forward to watching live online on channel 6 and was vexed that seemed at the last minute that that was not allowed to happen.

    You’re right, the City controls the whole venue and can and have played last-minute tricks when there are a lot of “conspiracy nuts” expected to show up. I just get so mad and believe these tricks need to be exposed.

    I personally think there are so many clearly incriminating scholarly published studies against fluoride for at least the last 15 years that it seems absurd for we the people to have to keep showing up for these meetings and letting our officials know we do not want fluoride. Also I do not buy that dentists just don’t have a clue about fluoride (and mercury too for that matter). Dentists belong to the ADA special interest group that is paying for and fostering the cities continuing to poison us.

  9. Thank you so much for this information. I will be watching online tonight. As I stated in a reply to Jim I just made, I was really ticked that it was not televised live. I apologize for tone of my original post. I just have watched for many years the city and the county and other governmental entities play little tricks on we the people in situations like this for public meetings.

    Did anyone say what the next stip will be or what concrete steps the City will make in their consideration of removing fluoride from our water?

  10. So do I.

    Jim wasn’t there, but I can tell you there was a great turnout.  The Boards and Commissions room was packed,
    with people spilling into the hall, as we had hoped for.  When Randi Shade admonished the crowd not to be
    “rowdy”, a few even  left the B & C room so they could clap and cheer in front of the screen outside.  Eventually, the
    Council Chambers was opened for the overflow. 

    Watch it tonight, 7 pm, at or later, same place, on demand under “City Council” tab.

  11. Perfectly OK.  We, too, get the feeling that maybe little tricks were being played.  For one thing, Laura Morrison wasn’t present –
    called away by a family emergency (her father’s sickness, we were told), but she didn’t even send an aide.  We
    were told she will “carefully review” the information afterward.  Ha!

    Nobody committed to anything (no surprise).  But Martinez appeared very attentive, for once, and asked for a
    copy of Dr. Connett’s slide presentation.  That’s progress!

  12. After watching the meeting on Channel 6 last night, all but the last few minutes that is, I was struck by how inept,and to me dishonest seeming and truly embarrassing for the citizens, was the testimony by the three pro-fluoride doctors…

    Dr. Delton Yarbrough, Chair, Council on Dental Economics, Texas Dental Association

    “Dr. Cecil George” (M.D. ??? who knows)

    Dr. Philip Huang, Medical Director, Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department

    However, I was left with one main puzzlement. How could such overwhelming evidence in the form of at least a hundred or more professional scholarly studies done con fluroidation of water be simply ignored or defended by those three doctors in such a pitifully weak way.

    To me, when you see the establishment staunchly defending something that clearly is indefensible and injurious to the citizens, the fluoridation of our city water supply, you have to …


    Dr. David Kennedy told me when I called in to a radio show on 2-17-10 asked why mayors are so adamant about continuing their city’s fluoridation when the city’s people clearly do not want it. Dr. Kennedy explained that the makers of fluoridated products like toothpaste, and the people who make and sell the fluoridation chemicals to the city water managers donate large sums of money to various professional dental associations that dentists belong to. The associations are “non-profit” and sort of function as money laundering entities. Then the local dentists can, purportedly in their names, donate money, large significant amounts of money, to a mayor’s (council member’s) campaign fund, If the dentists want continued political power in their community as well as coninued professional status and success, they belong to those professional associations and they make those donations to their mayors. If the mayor wants an adequate campaign fund so as to win election or re-election, the mayor keeps the fluoridation happening, keeps the city buying the fluoridation chemicals that keep filling up the associations’ funds, that in turn keep the campaign war chests full.

    If someone knows of how I can find out the names of the contributors to the campaign funds of our mayor and council members, I think getting that information may well supply the strongest weapon we have of getting the City to stop the fluoridation.

    The City of Watsonville in California worked hard for years and finally got the City to stop fluoridating but then this gang of special interests in cahoots with the city officials started refluoridating. I think there is a legal battle going on again and not sure how that came out.

    WE MUST expose the money trail of these political contributions by dentists and dental associations and political action committees to our mayor and council members and candidates NAMING NAMES and dollar amounts.

    This is about money & campaign contributions, not about how good or bad fluoride is for us.

  13. I should of mentioned I am not a local. I live in Florida and am just giving feedback and suggestions. Most of the tricks used are tried are tried and true that the health department and cities use.
    They control the process to their advantage as much as they can. Stall, delay and pray we get tired and go away. I have been told before I will go away sooner or later. Meetings where they will not answer anything and response letters that do not answer a single question asked. It is about repeating the same talking points over and over and quoted the CDC on safety and benefit and the perfect track record of safety and benefit.
    Many of the dentists truely are clueless of current fluoride science by design. The mercury issue still has about half who are strong supporters of its safety. Is it possible to be that stupid? They are actually at greatest risk along with their staffs who are rarely informed of the risks to them. So yes they would do this to their families also. Or at least many still would. Many know how evil mercury is but still remain silent to protect the profession. And their license to practice is at risk if they speak out. This is hardball time at its most evil by a trade association who had more income as it prime directive. Mercury fluoride and root canals are all high risk for the patients for future harm. And litigation ,hopefully soon.

  14. Why don’t you form a group to share the work you’re doing?  It’s harder to ignore a group than a single person working alone.

  15. If only we had the time and resources to dig out all that campaign contribution information!  I do know, however, that the Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department recently received a $7.4 million grant from the CDC for tobacco-related stuff, an area that Huang has been milking for 20 years.   

    Since Huang is the “gatekeeper” behind whose opinion the Council hides, this gives you an idea of the conflicts of interest that can be uncovered by even just a little research at the Google level. 

  16. I have the time to pour through contribution information. I tried to find out how much money the Texas Dental Association was giving to candidates with the Texas Ethics Commission data base online but it did not tell me much. It just showed a few $100 donations it received from individuals and said they keep a balance of $10,000, so that was a dead end.

    I need to know which databases to look in and I need a complete list of practicing dentists in Austin. Then I need to get the names and amounts posted online.
    Dr. David Kennedy explained how somehow the money that goes in to local dental associations is able to be donated to mayoral and council candidates and officers in each dentist’s own name. I need some more clarity on that as that seems like a money trail that would be hard to crack and follow.
    I honestly think exposing money trail and names is only thing that might bring change.

  17. Rae, You have done a great job of providing a forum in a city that seems ready to listen. Many that try fall short of being really excellent. I am not enough of a people person to want to deal with leading a organization. I enjoy the reading and speaking out so I do that part. I really believe the lawsuits are what is going to tip the scales over night. Read some of James Robert Deal and his Fluoride
    Class I believe the EPA is attempting to ignore most of the highest risk groups in their current review. You design the review to give the results you desire. Like with the last vit D review they refused to look at data unless it was only about bones which requires the lowest level. This was a con job by design by researchers who produce big pharma analogs of vit D which can be sold for big bucks. And make them rich from their patents like from U of Wisconsin where the board leader is a researcher. Most of the review panel had no vit d experience but were lead to a false low RDA.They also used a silly crazy low 11 ng/ml for deficient score. They also ignored blacks and their data who had 90% plus deficient. This was about keeping a huge market for new patent drugs based on vit d.
    Much of the process is about making money not healing people. Fluoridation is a perfect example of a flawed process based upon special interests wanting to avoid lawsuits and protect industry polluters selling toxic waste products as medication. H2SiF6 is from smokestack pollution scrubbers that were installed by orders from the EPA in 1972 at phosphate mines in Florida. Now it is a income source for state industry.

  18. Sounds like the
    Randy Share quote from the natural new article shows she plans support fluoridation as to be safe because all those like the CDC and health department plus ADA support it. Those actually citing the science against must be held to a higher standard while the promoters can state their past statements as proof-No real studies required.
    This follows the template so often used by cities. Should seem silly if you step back and think. If good quality proof of benefit existed they would have used it at every turn. They have Dogma and lots of dentists short on facts but long on beliefs. Also getting very rich repairing ugly fluoride discolored enamel they often claim they rarely see.
    Most dentists flat refuse to treat medicaid kids where many of the minority kids with the worst damage are. This is a huge conflict of interest. Poor blacks and hispanics are in effect being boycotted dentists. Incomes rise and dental health falls in those most fluoride damaged. In our county only 4 of over 200 dentists treat medicaid kids. We now have two public health dentists for 50,000 medicaid kids but had not one for many years. Then we had one for two years before the second started at the West side.
    This is a disaster dentists cause then ignore. Thank god some dentists are now speaking out as to the evils of fluoridation. It never was a solution ,just a bandaid that harmed far more then any help. K.M. Yoder, study shows just how little of fluoride science dentists know when tested. Look up at pub med Indiana and Illinois tested.

  19. What exactly is the change between the iphone 4 and i phone five which are coming out for United states of america?
    i would like to find out should it be worth it to buy the actual apple iphone 4 or if i must wait for apple iphone 5.

  20. I’m not a people person either!  You do what you have to do.  Although I founded Fluoride Free Austin, many people are now taking leadership roles in the group.  We are very good at pooling our varied talents and Austin is a city ready to listen, fortunately.  (as is Atlanta).  We’re really excited and heartened about what’s going on in Atlanta right now.  


  21. I agree that the money trail would be extremely helpful.  Remember, though, that at the time we first started bringing this issue up to the Council – less than 3 years ago – fluoridation had not been an issue in 40 years.  It was a done deal, and nobody had ever mounted an agressive challenge.  Since it was taken for granted, there was no particular reason for dentists or dental associations to be giving much money to Council members.  So I wouldn’t expect to find very large contributions to anybody for that period. 

    The real giving begins when they feel threatened.  So the current election is where I would start looking.   Shade, Morrison and Martinez, the incumbents in this current election, might have received something for their 2011 reelection campaigns. I’d start by contacting the reference
    desk of UT’s main (Perry Castaneda) library.  They have some dynamite research librarians who can probably point you in the direction of the right databases.  They can also lead you to directories (if any such exist) of the dentists practicing in Austin.   AYellow Pages search (very tedious) via will also bring up a lot of that information. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>