” Dr Michael Foley again went quiet when the
issue of  daily fluoride dosage came up.”

Margaret-Strelow-Rocky.-Mayor
” Dr Foley would do well to do a little research and read comments made by councillors themselves before he makes public statements about the reason why councillors – after considering both sides of the argument – voted against fluoride in the water,” Cr Strelow said.

“His ill-informed reactionary comments are an example of the type of behaviour which has contributed to this issue being such an emotive one within the broader community. “I would have expected better from a man in his position.”

More recently: 
Pro-fluoridationist Dr. M Foley is blinded by a diabolical ideology, which does not allow him to draw rational conclusions. (Public debate Mackay – (14 Sept. 2016))
His ideology is hostile to science, logic and history. His claim that fluoride does no harm to the thyroid gland is a typical response when he is out of his depth in fluoridated water. – See below:

” Iodine is a halogen.
The halogens are a series of non-metal elemants:

                 Fluorine, F
                 Chlorine, Cl
                 Bromine, Br
                 Iodine, I 
                 Astatine, At
“The problem is that fluoride is a ‘bully’. Any time an atom of fluoride
and an atom of any other halogen are in the same vicinity, the
fluoride will displace the other halogen and take its place”.
          – Dr. Terry Tennant, MD, MD(H), PSc.,D

MULTI-CILOUR-LINEThis is universal, probably throughout time and most likely throughout
the cosmos. We realise that dentists will see this as yet another
threat to their constant claims of fluoridation’s safety, but
to claim otherwise is to fly in the face of science.

See the  Periodic Table of the Elements f-cl-bri-at-ts

 STATISTICAL BIAS  

Sorry Dr. Foley, fluorides DO cause ‘Delayed  Eruption’.
Contrary to your public statement – 14 Sept. 2016.  
This is one of the factors that skews research results.
If  you do not know this basic for humans and animals,
we think you should consider dropping your title of doctor.
See Extract – Queensland Gov. Research below

copy-of-page-129-ag-journal-f
(This Research Was Funded by Queensland Government)
Go to page 129 – Delayed eruption, Book (A) below 

CHRONIC ENDEMIC FLUOROSIS OF MERINO
SHEEP IN QUEENSLAND
by
J. M. Harvey

See→ HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE dental-phenomena

Foley image Gladstone Observer

Fluoridation is “Safe and Effective”
Fluorocarbon gases are generally greenhouse gases with
global-warming potentials 100 to 20,000 times that of
carbon dioxide. Organofluorine compounds
persist in the environment due to
the strength of  the carbon–fluorine bond.
Fluorine has no known metabolic role in mammals in fact,
a few plants synthesize organofluorine poisons that deter herbivores.

Hypothyroidism Fluoride and Iodine

And  HERE

m-foley-sept-2016

See also  →  UNICEF aid Project.

Anti-Fluoride Groups were called “lunatic, conspiracy, fringe’
by Michael Foley – Brisbane Courier Mail – 2 Oct. 2016.

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser”.
 Socrates

Many Queensland Shires, voters, whole nations, scientist, including
Nobel Prize Winners may not be impressed by his angry comments.

30 Aust. Defence Bases contaminated with fluoride chemical (PFOA)

 When Gerry Adams And Ian Paisley Worked Together  

Errors & Omissions – 2016 NHMRC Fluoridation Paper
  “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies and statistics.”
  – Mark Twain

abc-radio-612-logo

   Comments:  → Download audio

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Merilyn Haines is absolutely correct when she says that most Australian doctors know very little about the adverse health effects of fluoride. I have skeletal fluorosis, and am fluoride sensitive, with many symptoms. For years I tried to find a doctor who could help me, but they couldn’t help. Eventually I figured out for myself that the problem was fluoride, mainly from fluoridated water. By that stage I had such severe joint problems that I could barely do the most basic things required to look after myself, and I am not old. Eight years later, most of my symptoms have disappeared or greatly improved, but even though there has been great improvement with my joints my activity is still severely restricted. Skeletal fluorosis can be permanent if it progresses too far. Michael Foley is a shameless hypocrite and liar, who should be in jail. If he wants to see poor quality research, he need only look at that which he and his fellow fluoridationists rely on. If anyone wants more information, they could start with the Fluoride Action Network website, Declan Waugh’s work, the journal Fluoride, and the 2006 US National Research Council report on fluoride in drinking water. There are also some good Australian websites.

Posted by: Joe Bloggs | 12 March 2013 at 02:54 AM

 If in doubt leave it out! Good on you Merylin Hines, I’m with you 100%. I was always made to believe that cavaties where caused by sugary foods? Let’s ban companys like Coca cola from destroying our communities teeth? But typical of todays model of medicine we deny food and nutrition and run around looking for the next magical elixer to market and sell. I don’t want chemicals added to my water thankyou, yet I am denied this simple human right as long as I live in a flurodated region.

Posted by: Matthew 12 March 2013 at 09:41 AM
The Australian Constitution is there to limit the powers the re-representatives (not nannies) excise over we the people. We’ve never at Referendum approved of this industrial waste mass medication. I’m a big boy now and my children know how to use a tooth brush. Take that waste product out of the municipal drinking water until such a time as we the people in the majority ask for it via Referendum.

Posted by: Rodney Stevens | 12 March 2013 at 10:41 AM

 Dr Michael Foley again went quiet when the issue of daily fluoride dosage came up. Thing is, the whole topic should be mute as Dr Michael Foley is not my doctor. ABC, when did it become legal for governments and dentists to force dosages on Australians? Permission has never been given thus why the medical indemnity protection is in place to protect those like Dr Michael Foley. Why do they need protection from something they say is safe? Doctors used to indorse smoking as well. Dr Michael Foley, you are not my doctor. Dr Michael Foley, you are not my nanny. 95% of world agree with me.

Posted by: Rodney Stevens | 12 March 2013 at 11:51 AM

 I don’t want fluoride in my water – that should be enough!Why should I have it when I don’t want it and don’t need it – or is Queensland Health the new unelected dictatorship of Queensland?
Posted by: Colin Bishop | 12 March 2013 at 12:02 PM

 No I do not want fluoride in the water…natural water full of healthy minerals, flows constantly beneathe the ground, for us all to drink. 
However, if we keep polluting the natural water, via coal seam gas and chemicals, then heaven help us….but then again, maybe it is already helping us, with all the floods that Queensland has recently experienced….maybe these floods are flushing out these toxic chemicals from our water supplies. I guess we humans had better get over and on with the fact, that nature overides nurture, every time, regards.

Posted by: Rev. Michelle De La Rente | 12 March 2013 at 12:07 PM

 Well Foley shold have asked to provide the study done by the NHMRC and TGA CDC and the FDA ….NONE done and their push to fluoridate is flawed. The enviromental problems : 
AS for litigation one needs to look back at Germany and damage done 100 rears ago.
Approximately 17 million Litres of poison water is released into the environment annually.
This run off also effects the Great Barrier Reef via rivers.

*Economically wasteful..
100% water is fluoridated ..
40% lost in leaks before you get it.
40% into the environment where it is not supposed to go
of the 60% left 7/8 used by industry and farmers
the 1/8 left that comes in to your house you drink less than 1% of it.
You water the lawn, flush the toilet, take baths you do all sorts of
things with but you are not drinking it..

Your drinking less than 1% of the 1% and if you look at the number of children with a so called tooth problems it is about 3% of the population.
We now have 3% of population drinking of the 3% of 1% of 1/8 of 60% of all the water you bothered to fluoridate, so is this the way to
deliver an illegal medication to those who don’t drink the water supply in the first place ???.

Posted by: Brains 12 March 2013 at 01:22 PM

 It’s pretty rich of Merilyn Haines to say that calling fluoride natural is “misleading”. I can count a number of times she can be considered misleading;

– “industrial waste”: table salt is always table salt no matter if it’s from a salt lake or urea.
– “600 mg of lead”: that is 0.6% of the fluoride mix. When diluted down to 1 part per million, this lead is 6 parts per billion!
– pointing to these trace chemicals is in itself misleading, when the argument is about fluoride.
– She focuses on the results of adult tooth decay in children (teeth without much time to have developed tooth decay) as opposed to baby teeth.
– She misrepresents the 2007 NSW Dental Health Survey, which concluded far less fluorosis and a noted difference in tooth decay between fluoridated and non-fluoridated regions.
– She doesn’t name the study, but previously when she talks about osteosarcoma, she has been referring to Bassin et al (2006). The researchers behind this study couldn’t replicate the appearance of osteosarcoma and stressed caution in drawing the relationship.

Dr Foley did a great job, but it made no difference to her position regardless how often he corrected her.

I’ve been following this fluoridation matter for a few months now and I am amazing by how they interact with the science. For instance the 2007 NSW survey or the Bassin paper; neither support their position and yet, even when this is brought to their attention, they continue to use them as though the papers do.

Posted by: Moth | 12 March 2013 at 03:45 PM

Wow this is a great debate from ABC regarding Fluoride in drinking water. It provides views from both sides of the argument and clearly highlights the major difference, one side is based on ideology, the other on research and facts.

If you have any doubts or questions regarding the Fluoride debate,
take the time and listen. 
It is really worth it.

Posted by: kate | 12 March 2013 at 04:37 PM

 Marilyn Haines, made very valid points. Take fluoride out of the water supply. The best way is to prevent tooth decay is to apply it directly to the teeth. Michael Foley tried to discredit her but what he did not say that no amount of water will save baby teeth from the affect of dinking sugar laden juice etc. and being too young to clean their teeth before they go to sleep.

Posted by: V McVety | 13 March 2013 at 11:42 AM

 Fluorosis is caused by an intake of too much fluoride over a period of time, from a various of sources including tap water. Duhh?? Great debate Merilyn Haines… Too bad I couldn’t listen to it all, it was cut and inaccessible just after you mentioned your sister.. Shame.

Posted by: Britz | 13 March 2013 at 12:25 PM

 Dr Michael Foley is just another classic example of why we, as a Nation, are in such a poor state of Health ..
Shame on you Dr Foley .. Your ignorance is “bliss”

Posted by: Glenn Williams | 14 March 2013 at 07:48 AM

 What a great debate.

Foley is yet another blind, myopic, ignorant and myopic ego bound “professional” who as a dentist would use DISTILLED WATER to clean his dental equipment (search  autoclave ).
In hearing this recording, now many times, I personally can see at least 20 mistakes that Foley makes. He would not debate me as he would lose.
I would really like to see a record of where Dr. Foley has received his income over time, if or not he has accepted directly or indirectly any payments, inducements or ‘favors’ in any form from any associated with the HUGE fluoride proponents.
This is simple: Do not fluoridate drinking water – let people decide.
This arrogance of nanny state forced medication is a simple debate.
               Posted by: Phillip  30 December 2013 at 12:01 PM

MULTI-CILOUR-LINE
The Question to promoters of fluoridation:

“What primary scientific studies (not bogus reviews conducted by pro-fluoridation agencies) can you cite that gives you the confidence to ignore or dismiss the evidence that fluoride damages the brain as documented in over
300 animal and human studies (including 50 IQ studies).”

CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 87 (Queensland)

MULTI-CILOUR-LINE

there-are-a-lot-of-us