Search Results for: topical ingested fluoride

Fluoride debate: Arguments Against Fluoridation Thread. Part 8. Paul

This is Paul Connett’s response to Ken Perrott’s last article Fluoride debate: Response to Paul’s 5th article For Paul Connett’s original article see – Fluoride debate Part 1: Connett. Ken’s response to my last posting once again is incomplete and … Continue reading

Fluoride debate: Response to Paul’s 5th article

This is Ken Perrott’s response to Paul Connett’s last article Fluoride debate: Arguments against fluoridation thread. Part 5. Paul. For Paul Connett’s original article see – Fluoride debate Part 1: Connett. Paul’s last article was another Gish gallop of arguments … Continue reading

Fluoride debate: Response to Paul’s 6th article.

This is Ken Perrott’s response to Paul Connett’s last article Fluoridation debate: Against Fluoridation Thread. Part 6. For Paul Connett’s original article see – Fluoride debate Part 1: Connett. Discussion in comments section: The quality of the discussion in the … Continue reading

Fluoride Debate: Why I support fluoridation – response to Connett

This is Ken Perrott’s response to Paul Connett’s first criticisms of Ken’s article Fluoride debate: Why I support fluoridation – Response from Connett. For Ken Perrott’s original article see – Fluoride debate: Why I support fluoridation. First this issue of science … Continue reading

Fluoride debate Part 1a – response to Connet’s response: Perrott

This is Ken Perrott’s response to Paul Connett’s article Fluoride debate Part 1a – response: Connett I think Paul’s response illustrates some of the problems in discussions of the fluoridation issue. He shows a selective approach to data, indulges in unwarranted extrapolation … Continue reading

Topical confusion persists

I got a little leaflet from the Hamilton City Council the other day – with my rate demand. The leaflet tells me the council has stopped adding fluoride to the city’s water supply, gives some advice on alternative sources of … Continue reading

Fluoridation – topical confusion

Please note the update below* Some people claim both supporters and opponents of fluoridation agree on one thing. That the benfits of fluroide come from topical application  and not via systemic intake or ingestion of fluoridated water. Well, that’s not … Continue reading

Fluoridation

Over the last few years I have often posted articles related to community water fluoridation (CWF), the scientific issues involved and the misinformation and distortions that inevitably go with the public discussion of the issue. The public debates go on, the claims … Continue reading

Open letter to Jane Nielson – a “fluoridation convert.”

Hi Jane, I read your article in the Sonoma County Gazette which was republished at Paul Connett’s Fluoride Alert website – Fluoridation convert. A scientist explains what changed her mind. You briefly described scientific studies which you claim convinced you to take … Continue reading

Fluoridation debate: Against Fluoridation Thread. Part 6.

This is Paul Connett’s response to Ken Perrott’s last article Fluoridation debate: Why I support fluoridation – 2nd reply to Connett. For Ken Perrott’s original article see – Fluoride debate: Why I support fluoridation. When is Ken going to present his case for … Continue reading