Fluoridation of the water supply in Israel is to end by 2014


9708420_fluoride-water460In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court in Israel has ruled that all public water fluoridation in the state of Israel must cease by 2014.

The court’s ruling is remarkable in that it goes even further than – and thus overturns – the decision taken earlier this year by Isreal’s Minister for Health, Yael German, who had legislated for an end to mandatory fluoridation, leaving the option open to local councils to fluoridate water supplies at their own discretion. Now, however, by order of the Supreme Court, fluoridation in Israel is definitively at an end. This is regarded as a crucial victory by anti-fluoridation campaigners, especially given the close diplomatic and economic links between Israel and the US – the original home of the policy of fluoridation.



32 thoughts on “Fluoridation of the water supply in Israel is to end by 2014

  1. No Ken, it is now widely known and accepted by thinking people that the term “Conspiracy Theory” was set in stone and coined and used to dismiss those who believe in questioning authority. The CIA was heavily involved in using this term and promoting this term many years ago to discredit anyone who did not believe in nor go in line with many of
    the upper 1 % of the corporations; greedy banksters and crooked politicians who want to run our lives; change laws for their benefits and make huge profits and put into laws that we will always question. Who are you beholding to Ken ? Who have you worked for and where is your money invested? Bet I get no answers to any of those questions.
    Being a conspiracy theorists is not a bad thing as Fox News would want most to believe. Everyone, that term, Conspiracy theorist has been planned for a long time to diminish our movement and to discredit us so take that term with a grain of sand and anyone who uses it as well.

  2. Ken, the deterioration of oral health has much M U C H ! ! ! more to do with diet ; stress levels ; poor teeth hygiene AND ASTRONOMICAL DENTAL CARE FEES and very little to do with harmful chemicals put into our water. This is just more manipulating propaganda from the petro-chemical and drug industries (mega-corporations) wanting to make a buck not too unlike the 1080 issue. We need neither ! and anyone who defends the use of either, I ask, which relative or friend or even yourself are connected with or employed by these very ugly and greedy and polluting corporations ??? Anyone invested in any of them ? Bet our pm is invested, you know the ” corporation in disguise of a man “.

  3. Ken, if you actually read it. This will mean that fluoridation cannot happen after 12 months. The new regulations mean that fluoridation WILL NOT BE PERMITTED to occur after 12 months. We don’t care about your inconsequential obfuscations. 7.8 million people will no longer be forced to consume this toxic waste Ken. Great aye.

    1. Ken, it won’t even be “voluntary” any longer. Under the new legislation there will be no option to fluoridate after 12 months. You’re thinking of the situation PRIOR to this latest legislation.

    1. Seems funny when the data shows something other than your pre-conceived idea. If you react like this, your’e clearly not a scientist. You’re just trying to be controversial. Your narrow-mindedness is almost entertaining.

  4. Thanks Ken, that’s the clearest and most concise answer I’ve had on the subject, and that’s all I wanted, thanks!
    For what it’s worth, my stance on water fluoridation is that medicating the water takes away the freedom to choose. If you want fluoride, surely there’s enough in your toothpaste?
    Besides, I mostly use water for for showers and baths, cooking, and watering the garden. How does fluoridation benefit any of these things?
    I think it mostly benefits those who profit from the sale of chemicals.
    For the sake of interest, I came across this pdf (seems to be from late 2012): https://www.publichealthreviews.eu/upload/pdf_files/11/00_Zusman.pdf

    I respect your right to disagree on this subject Ken. The fluoride debate is much the the vaccination issue: people are usually heavily gravitated one way or the other with no quarter given.
    Both sides can produce facts and figures to back up their views ’til the end of time.
    Thanks again for your answer to my question Ken, cheers.

    1. Ken – it’s been shown that money will be saved by stopping fluoridation.
      Do i need to refer you to the declining decay rates in non fluoridated areas again?

      Fluoridation endings

      • In Kuopio, Finland, no increase in caries three years afterwards (Caries Research).

      • In La Salud, Cuba, seven years afterwards caries remained low in 6 to 9-year-olds, decreased in 10 to 11-year-olds, significantly decreased in 12 to 13-year-olds, while caries-free children increased dramatically (Caries Research).

      •I In the East German cities Chemnitz and Plauen a significant fall in caries prevalence was observed afterwards (Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology).

      • In Durham, NC, decay rates remained stable during an 11-month break in fluoridation but dental fluorosis declined in children born during that period (Journal of Dental Research).

      • In British Columbia, Canada, the prevalence of caries decreased over time in a fluoridation-ended community while remaining unchanged in a fluoridated community (Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology).

      • In 1973, the Dutch town of Tiel stopped fluoridation. Researchers counted drilled, missing, and filled tooth surfaces (DMFS) of Tiel’s 15-year olds, then collected identical data from never-fluoridated Culemborg. DMFS initially increased in Tiel then dipped to 11 percent of baseline from 1968 to 1988 while never-fluoridated Culemborg’s 15-year-olds had 72 percent fewer cavities over the same period (Caries Research).

      • Timaru stopped fluoridation in 1985 and since then the prevalence of caries has progressively reduced.

      Conclusions are that the HCC made a sound fluoridation tribunal decision and the dental establishment and its acolytes keep barking up an ideological tree.

  5. That’s a totally valid point by Alvin Toffler and the discussion above it clearly shows how some people have a ” Belief” that fluoride works. It’s hard to argue against an institutional belief held by professionals ,but it certainly exists, look at what Colquhoun said way back in the 90’s. Being told not to say things, having to lie about dental fluorosis, manipulation of study methodology, good grief, this is public health! Topically it seems to work, at 1000+ PPM+ but when you look at the 5yo stats from the Ministry of health the Kids in non fluoridated portions of a district have lower DTMF rates( cavities), this applies in Waitemate, Counties Manukau, Waikato( where all the recent fuss was), Bay of Plenty, Hutt Valley, Capital and Coast, Wairarapa and Canterbury ! I’m not sure what ever they are measuring here has anything to do with fluoride, especially when you consider the ratio’s of the stats, measuring 10,000 Fluoridated kids in Auckland vs 180 Non fluoridated kids (from Onehunga) . Socio-demographics ring a bell ?
    Also where do they get the 2000 fluoridated kids from in Nelson Marlborough ? the only fluoridated place in Nelson Marlborough is the Air Force Base. Does it have 1643 resident 12 year olds ? No, they are visitors from other areas. Even then, they compared them to just 230 Non fluoridated kids from Blenheim /Nelson. Yet when it came to 5 year olds they had no trouble finding 1060 Non-fluoridated kids.
    Even our NZ stats are just manipulated lies. It’s just rubbish.

    Imagine if I sold a glue, that glue was normally called something else and just happened to be made from the wet down chimney fumes which otherwise cost millions to dispose of. Yet I’m allowed to call it glue i because it makes things 15% stickier than using nothing at all , but it might not work in some geographical areas. I’d say that would be a load of ____.
    Now to make that “glue” compulsory by adding it to the water supply, that’s total ____

  6. Ken, Are you too old to RELEARN?
    I assume you’re an old man of old science. Did your Doctor smoke Camels?

    Fortunately for us you’re dogma will eventully die along with your dogged mind. We’d rather you were capable of changing your mind and supporting our movement to save children from this heinous experiment. Please give it a try.

    “Fluoride science is corporate science, fluoride science is DDT science, it’s asbestos science, it’s tobacco science, it’s a racket!” – Christopher Bryson

    “As a physician, I have been a victim of ‘pro fluoride’ propaganda and misinformation all my life,” – Dr Anna Goodwin

    “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time. “–Robert Carton, Ph.D. former US EPA scientist.

    Based on new research, a former fluoridation proponent changes his opinion about the alleged safety and benefits of water fluoridation

  7. Maybe you’re just incapable of understanding the right to choose non-fluoridated water?

    Unless you debunk The Fluoride Deception we will class you as disinfo and remove your propaganda from this forum.

    Fluoridation is a violation of rights with risks founded on fraud. Until that reality/fact changes, please take your dogma somewhere else.

    Until then; check those W.H.O. stats again.

  8. What a can of worms! I guess we’ll find find out next year whether Israel goes Flouride-free or not….errr…or not?

  9. Ken perhaps before you go around calling other groups “dishonest” you should state your own position as an emphatic pro fluoridationist who makes scathing remarks on public record about his fellow science “friends” and whose blog is simply a mechanism for very selectively aiming libellous and false accusations at groups with public health concerns.

    1. What I’m as on about Ken is that you are a staunch pro fluoridationist and I’ve seen how your blog arguments always end up stating that anti-fluoridationists are dishonest and somehow this leads you to make frequent remarks about religious beliefs and aethism. I think you need to grow up a little, understand that we live in a country with an extremely high cancer rate with no “known” causes and that public health deserves a precautionary approach especially in the light of virtually no research money going into harms. All this risk for a 15% difference in decay, only amongst children and only in about half of the places it is supposed to work. It’s a no brainer

      1. Ken, you’re so misguided. You seem to be one of these ‘take it to the grave’ toxic evangelists. The message from this decision has been simplified – effectively the courts have supported and reinforced the decision to stop fluoridation by clarifying the ruling. They have also ordered compensation to the petitioners for the having their time wasted.

        You’re making a storm in a teacup about the exact way this message is communicated. It’s not dishonest, it’s just slightly simplified.

        Take this as a warning. Stop wasting our time and threatening our health. Those who support mass involuntary medication using a dangerous toxins are fascists and enemies of freedom.

        Fluoride is not effective. Check the WHO data – even a simpleton can see it’s a farce and based on fraudulent ‘science’ = The Fluoride Deception. If you didn’t get the fraud part you need to watch/read it again.

    2. Half way thru it. Regathered myself and readjusted my American dream. To say thank you American Military is a understatement.

    1. Fluoride alert is reputable, very reputable, written by a scientist who spent 17 years studying water fluoridation. Its the manipulated stats and efficacy studies performed by toothpaste sponsored dental schools that are using dentists to ” debunk” the work of toxicologists that are dishonest.

    2. Ken, yes calcium fluoride can be used. It was used in the only short trial in Japan. Also that’s what’s found in “NATURALLY” fluoridated water. So of course it’s sufficiently soluble. There is empirical evidence of it. And you think you’re a scientist.

    3. Solubility of CaF2 15mg per litre Ken. It seems you’re dogma and age may be interfering with your calculations. You seem to ignore the fact that it has already been done. Your flawed opinion is irrelevant.

      1. Ken, it can be done. It has been proven when people artificially bore drinking water wells deep into rock that nobody was meant to get near, and the Japanese have done it. You can dissolve up to 15mg of CaF2 per litre. Seems like you may be suffering from the early stages of dementia.

      2. Ken, it isn’t my job to spoon feed you, which is what you obviously need. CaF2 can be dissolved at up to 15ppm, are you suggesting that 1ppm isn’t feasible? The best level of fluoride is zero, however in the mean time the best thing to do is to keep with the status quo in Hamilton and NOT ADD any artificial silicofluoride chemicals.

    4. Ken. Israel will be ending artificial water fluoridation within 12 months. Your ravings about a perceived technical error in the way it was reported only confirm that you like to make a big deal about things that are essentially irrelevant. Good thing that Israel isn’t full of dogmatic old narrow minded has-beens.

      1. Ken, whatever bigotry and dogma exists in Israel, they have already proven it is noting compared to yours. Congratulations.

  10. You’re confused Blossom? Hell, I’m confused too after reading that, ahem, “clarification”. Clear as mud.

  11. Earlier in 2013, mandatory fluoridation was ended by the Isareli Minister for Health (as I understand the matter) but she/he planned to fluoridate where she saw a need to do so. Yesterday I received word that the Isareli High (some say Supreme) Court ruled that fluoridation must cease by 2014. Today I’ve been forwarded an email from someone in Israel whose explanation is below. I am now confused. Any clear interpretation of the intent of the message would be welcomed:

    ‘This is what’s going on so far in Israel: the Minister of Health’s decision to end fluoridation within a year is based on the water regulations that were determined by the Knesset (based on one member’s vote but that’s another story) to stop fluoridating automatically every year, but to re-examine the issue again within a year. In this decision, the Minister of Health ended the resistance of her office to sign on the regulations, because they did not agree to sign on the water regulations as long as they contained this order about fluoridation. The court accepted this Minister of Health’s formal decision, this is not an unusual step for courts, it was expected (since this decision was made after the lawsuit had been filed by Izun Hozer organization). The judges wrote as a side note, that the regulations were not formulated in an optimal way, because they were not written clearly: when the Ministry of Health decided to end fluoridation, they had to write the cease of fluoridation as the main issue, and continuing fluoridation as a secondary issue, as transition period, and not as it was done. They also wrote that because of the circumstances, while paying attention to the controversy and because there was a policy change before the disussion of this lawsuit, the Ministry of Health will pay for the cost of this lawsuit. The judges wrote also that they had written for themselves that the state of Israel committed to end fluoridation. On a side note, it’s also important to notice that The Minister of Health is preparing a plan with her office, to fluoridate populations who “really need” artificial fluoridation, something that I have never heard from any other country that stopped fluoridation. I suggest to see what happens in practice within a year. There are some groups that press to continue to fluoridate, like pediatrists who are backed by the WHO. I hope it helps to clarify the situation.’

  12. Israel…! Who would have thought? Can it really be that the tide is turning? One reads so much ‘bad press’ about Israel that I do a double take at this. So…who’s next?

Comments are closed.

Next Post

Confessions Of An Economic Hitman

Thu Aug 8 , 2013
A confessional by a former global banker, John Perkins, on the use of usury to enslave independent nations by the IMF, World Bank and other agencies. As part of their plan, the bankers use assassination, slander, and coups to maintain their positions of power and to prevent the truth about […]

You May Like