Logo

In what was intended to be a on camera interview early Saturday morning turned into something very different.

When I arrived downtown, I discovered that the memory card for our camera was not working, but decided to go with an off camera interview.

The off camera interview that started at 8:30, ended up being a 3 hour conversation covering many topics (that really felt more like just having coffee with a friend). That I walked away from with a very good feeling about.

Richard really seems the grasp the common sense issue's facing Brantford, in a way that I have not heard from any other candidates as of this point.

The first topic I asked about was water fluoridation. Richard was very aware of the risks involved with the addition of fluoride to the public water supply. And fully agreed that the public should have a choice in the matter.
After seeing the lack of knowledge that many other city employee's had about fluoride, Richards knowledge was a breath of fresh air.

When asked about the effects of NAFTA and the coming North American Union on Brantfords economy, His response was that it is very obvious. When you look at our manufacturing industry. We have lost countless jobs, and business's in that Field.
Another point that Richard brought up about our local economy is the excess of temporary employment agencies.

In a city of 91,000 people there is over 150 temp agencies that employ nearly 40,000 people. These agencies do not give benefits, and rarely pay more then minimum wage. How can we expect the working class families to survive on this Richard asks.

In Richards opinion there has to be incentives for companies that come to Brantford, to hire people rather then using these types of agencies.

On the issue of the Native Land claims Richard believes that the city can no longer write up a plan, present it to the Native people, and wonder why they find problems in it. We need to include all sides in the planning. Which to me just sounds like common sense once again!

What impressed me the most with Richard is the fact that he does not accept any corporate sponsorships. It is his belief that if we want a change in our community, it does not make any sense to keep trying the same things over and over again and expect different results.

Richard is a great candidate for the mayor of Brantford, and I will look forward to hearing more from him.

Dr Hardy Limeback, former President of the Canadian Association of Dental Research and current Head of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, is now calling for the end of water fluoridation. Limeback, a former proponent of fluoridation changed his mind in the wake of new studies showing little benefit to teeth from ingesting fluoride, and a growing body of research indicating links between fluoride and adverse effects including hip fracture, cancer and arthritis.

Fluoride avoidance reduced anemia in pregnant women, and decreased preterm births, according to a new study.

Anemia in pregnancy can lead to maternal and infant mortality; it continues to be a problem despite nutritional counseling and maternal iron and folic acid supplementation.

Medical News Today reports:

“Anemic pregnant women living in India, whose urine contained 1 mg/L fluoride or more, were separated into two groups. The experimental group avoided fluoride in water, food and other sources ...

Results reveal that anemia was reduced and pre-term and low-birth-weight babies were considerably fewer in the fluoride-avoidance group.”


Sources:

Medical News Today September 3, 2010

Current Science May 25, 2010, Vol. 98, No. 10

Dr. Mercola's Comments:

Many people are confused about fluoride and they believe that since it is “naturally” found in some water supplies it should be healthy and necessary for optimal human health.

While the logic is sound, it just isn’t true for fluoride. It is a poison when added to the water supply as most U.S. cities do, and it is a poison when occurring naturally as this study demonstrates.

This study was conducted in India, which is one of several countries known to have dangerously high levels of fluoride in their drinking water. This poison comes into contact with water supplies naturally when rocks containing fluoride erode or volcanic activity spews fluoride-containing ash into the air, allowing the colorless, odorless substance to enter groundwater.

In areas where naturally occurring fluoride is high, serious health problems usually become apparent, and that is, unfortunately, what's happening now in India where children are suffering vision loss and bone deformities due to high fluoride exposure.

This study, however, has major implications not only for people in India but for those all over the world who are exposed to fluoride. In the United States, for instance, fluoride is intentionally added to water supplies, putting unborn children at risk.

Fluoride Poses Serious Risks for Pregnant Women and Their Unborn Children

In this latest study, when anemic pregnant women avoided fluoride in their water, food and other sources, their anemia was reduced and premature and low-birth-weight babies were significantly less likely compared to pregnant women exposed to fluoride.

Anemia is a serious complication during pregnancy that can lead to both maternal and infant death, and it appears that fluoride may play a direct role in causing this dangerous condition.

Specifically, fluoride may damage the gastrointestinal mucosa, leading to impaired nutrient absorption and related illnesses like anemia. It has also been linked to:

* Decreased red blood cells
* Reduced blood folic acid activity
* Inhibitions in vitamin B12 production
* Non-absorption of nutrients for hemoglobin synthesis

When the pregnant women avoided fluoride, however, their intestinal lining regenerated, leading to enhanced nutrient absorption and reduced anemia, along with a decreased risk of pre-term birth and improved birth weights for their babies.

In the United States, a similar connection has also been made. Researchers from the State University of New York reported that premature births were more common in communities with fluoridated drinking water than those with non-fluoridated water.

More Reasons Why You Don’t Want to “Fluoridate” Your Baby

Fluoride is a drug. You can't get fluoride without a prescription, yet, if you live in the United States it's being added to your water supply on a mandatory basis at various levels that may or may not be safe for various individuals, especially children, pregnant women, the sick, and the elderly.

Approximately 50 percent of the fluoride that you ingest each day ends up accumulating in your bones over a lifetime. So you're steadily increasing the fluoride levels in your bones over time, which has been linked to arthritis-like symptoms such as joint pains and osteoporosis.

Fluoride also lowers thyroid function. It was used in medicine during the 1930s through 1950s in Europe to treat patients with overactive thyroid glands. This is a very real and significant concern, especially today as millions of people suffer with low thyroid function.

Fluoride in the United States is a Toxic Pollutant

Ninety percent of the chemicals used in fluoridation in the United States do not occur naturally.

Dr. William Hirzy from the EPA has pointed out that if it goes into the air, it's a pollutant. If it goes into the local water, it's pollution. But if the public water utilities buy it and pour it in your drinking water, it's no longer a pollutant. All of a sudden like magic it's a beneficial public health measure (even though fluoride has no benefits whatsoever when ingested).

But even the American Dental Association (ADA), which for many years was one of fluoride's biggest advocates, changed its tune a few years back and warned that parents of infants younger than a year old "should consider using water that has no or low levels of fluoride" when mixing baby formula.

The ADA was concerned about fluorosis, a condition caused by too much fluoride that damages the enamel of teeth and has been linked to more serious developmental problems. Studies have associated fluorosis with lower IQ, endocrine system problems, and skeletal damage.

How to Get Fluoride Out of Your Drinking Water

Sadly, for many people in India and other developing countries there is no access to safer water supplies or reverse osmosis filters that could remove the naturally occurring fluoride from the water, and now generations of children are growing up with serious health problems as a result.

There, the solution lies in securing safer water supplies or filters to remove the naturally occurring poison.

In the United States, there needs to be more pressure to prompt the government to stop adding this poison to municipal water supplies intentionally. The Fluoride Action Network has created a statement calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide that has now been signed by over 3,000 professionals.

We encourage all medical and science professionals to sign this statement.

In the United States, we're likely not going to be able to pass a federal law against fluoridation. There is not going to be a Presidential mandate or even a statewide elimination. This change will occur one community at a time.

So stay tuned, as we will be working to devise a complete game plan to tackle this issue head on. Once we reach the tipping point, which may be as little as 5 percent of the population, we will be able to reverse the policies of water fluoridation.

Until then, you can remove about 80% of the fluoride from your drinking water using a reverse osmosis (RO) filter. It is really hard to remove all of it with virtually any commercial filter. If you are concerned about fluoride the BEST solution is to help the Fluoride Action Network in their campaign to remove it from the water supply.

Keep in mind, too, that water is not the only source of added fluoride.

Although you may not know it, you are exposed to fluoride from many sources other than the obvious lineup of toothpastes and mouth rinses (which I recommend using fluoride-free versions of as well).

Far less obvious sources of fluoride, which I highly recommend avoiding, include:

* Food and beverages processed with fluoridated water
* Mechanically de-boned meat
* Pesticide residue on food
* Pharmaceutical drugs, especially SSRI antidepressants and fluoroquinolone antibiotics like Cipro
* Soy baby formulas
* Instant tea

Two Excellent Fluoride Resources

Professor Paul Connett has informed us that on September 17 he and several other scientists and concerned citizens from the UK, Ireland, Austria and the United States testified before a hearing on water fluoridation organized by the EU’s Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) in Brussels.

Connett and others raised many concerns about fluoride’s ability to damage your teeth, bone, brain and your endocrine system. They also stressed that there is little solid scientific evidence that ingesting fluoride actually reduces tooth decay.

Professor Connett left the committee a manuscript copy of the book he has co-authored on fluoridation that will be available in October from publisher Chelsea Green, VT, titled “The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep it There.” Advanced orders for the book can be placed at Amazon.com.

While you are waiting for this book to reach the shelves, Professor Connett urges people to get their own personal copy of the DVD “Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation.”

If you have yet to watch this DVD it is a wonderful 30-minute introduction to the issue from 15 highly qualified experts, including a Nobel Prize winner in Medicine, and three members of the important National Research Council panel that published a landmark review of the toxicology of fluoride in water in 2006.

Source:
mercola.com

Brantford was the third city in the world to artificially fluoridate there public water supply. The test phase began in 1945.

According to the Brantford Expositor archives there is two articles posted about water fluoridation in 1945.

The first was on January 17th 1945, titled: "Fluorine Plans Are Advanced"
This article explains that the fluorine committee had been formed. With C. C. Cariss as the as the chairman, Dr. F. J. Wentworth as Vice chairman, and city clerk E. J. Campbell as secretary.

It then goes on to say that fluoride has very large dental benefits, as well as having a positive effect on hearing.

The second article was posted on September 26th 1945, titled: "Brantford Now Adding Fluorine to city water"
Here is the first section of the article.
"Pioneering in a new field of public health. The city of Brantford is the first municipality in Canada to add fluorine to the public water supply, as a means of improving the dental health of the community.

The public utilities commission disclosed today that fluorine has been added to the water for a period of three months, without any notification to the public, and there has been no public reaction. Not one complaint has been received of any "taste" or any difference since the fluorination project started last June."

It then goes on to say that the commission decided that fluorine had been given a fair trial without publicity, and it was now time to inform the public.

The fluorine project is a long range plan which will require a number of years to prove or disprove its value as an aid to dental health.


I looked for follow up studies about water fluoridation in Brantford or Brant county. I have been unable to find a single one. I spoke to several people in the public utilities commission, but none of them knew of any, and they did not even know when water fluoridation had started. There is no Brantford Expositor archives to any follow up testing either.

I also did extensive research into who the people on the fluorine committee where. Once again to my surprise there are next to no records of these people. I was able to come up with some marriage certificates but nothing past that. Although while I was researching these men, I came across a huge conflict of interest.

J. P. Ryan served as an alderman from 1932 - 1940, and as mayor from 1940 - 1945. He resigned within two months after water fluoridation became public. From 1932 until 1949 (the time of his death) he sat on the Brantford hospital and medical boards, as well as being the chairman of the Industrial board.

Thats right chairman of the Indutrial board (Source of the sodium fluoride) and the medical board (where they have promoted it as healthy for 65 years). How is that for a conflict of interest?


With this being the case, I decided to speak to our medical officer of health Dr. Lock. When he did not return my many phone calls, I went straight into his office to speak with him. He told me that fluoride is a natural occurring substance (which is a lie), and that he supports the practice of water fluoridation. For the poor people in the community that cannot afford toothpaste.

After that we went to city council and requested that a vote be held. So that the public could decide for themselves. This request was denied.


So lets get this straight.
Water fluoridation began in Brantford in the year 1945, with a requirement of further testing. No further testing has been done.
The people responsible for starting the project did so without any public input, and even though the CDC hails water fluoridation as one of the top 20 achievements of the 20th century. These people are not added to the history books.
The mayor at the time had a very large conflict of interest in the matter.
We have a head medical officer who is ignorant to the facts of fluoride, or has a reason to be lying about it. And also uses a bogus reason for supporting the practice.
We have a city council that will not allow the people of Brantford to vote on the issue.

This is why we need the people to stand up and demand justice! We Are Change Brantford has been working on our petition, under the Ontario fluoridation act a petition with 10% of the populations signatures can force a vote.

If you are interested in helping out, or signing the petition please contact us at wearechangebrant@live.ca

We Are Change Brantford has kicked off there poison in the tap water campaign. We were lucky enough to recieve a large amount of flyers, Thanks to all of our supporters! Here is two of the many to come video's of us painting the town yellow and letting people know that sodium fluoride is a harmful toxic waste.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Regarding Dr. Lynn Tomkins (President of the Ontario Dental Association), being appalled at my audacity to question the safety of fluoridation:

Dr. Tomkins quotes the Centre for Disease Control (U.S.) stating water fluoridation is one of the greatest medical accomplishments of the 20th century. This absurd statement was made back in the 1980s.

Since that statement, doctors in California and the U.S. Public Health Service, after 33 years of study, have gathered strong evidence that fluoride causes at least three types of cancer (liver, bone and thyroid).

The head of the department of preventative dentistry (University of Toronto) declared accumulated affects of fluoridation will be catastrophic. The Paediatric Society of Canada has also stated that giving fluoridated water to infants will irreversibly damage their teeth before they erupt.

Both the National Research Councils of Canada and the United States stated that fluoride is an endocrine disruptor (gender bender). Who are we going to believe?

The dental association maintains that this practice is perfectly safe; "Trust me I am your dentist." These people have stuffed patient's mouths with mercury for over one hundred years also saying (some still do) it is not harmful.

Thousands of lives have been ruined over the course of many years from mercury poisoning. Chewing food with mercury fillings releases 700 times the acceptable level of mercury as stated by the EPA (U.S.).

Now they are telling us this pollutant they admit is scrubbed from the chimneys of large phosphate fertilizer plants (not natural fluoride) hydrofluoric acid containing lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium and radium is safe for our babies, children and seniors to drink, and they have dumped this into our water supply since 1973. It should be known the residents in Alliston rejected this practice.

The World Health Organization has declared fluoride a drug, so to you Dr. Tomkins, do you feel you have the right to medicate all the people of Tottenham against the wishes of many?

Is your organization lobbying the provincial government to fluoridate all the communities in Ontario including Alliston, Beeton and Green Briar? They are, by the way.

Over 30 per cent of children in the U.S. and Canada have irreversible damage caused by this already. According to the ODA, this can only be caused by ingesting fluoride through a water source.

To quote Dr. Arvid Carlsson Nobel, "fluoridation is against all modern principles of pharmacology. It is obsolete. I don't think anybody, not even a single dentist, would bring up this question in Sweden anymore."

Need I say more?

Source:
simcoe.com

When it comes to fluoridating drinking water, Ontario and Quebec couldn't be further apart. Ontario has the country's highest rate of adding the tooth-enamel-strengthening chemical into municipal supplies, while Quebec has one of the lowest, with practically no one drinking fluoridated water.

But surprisingly, the two provinces have very little difference in tooth-decay rates, a finding that is likely to intensify the ongoing controversy over the practice of adding fluoride to water as a public health measure.

Quebeckers have more cavities than people in Ontario, but the difference is slight. Among children 6 to 19, considered the most decay-prone part of the population, the rate in Ontario was lower by less than half a cavity per child.

In the 6-11 age group, Ontario kids have 3.5 per cent fewer cavities than those in Quebec: 1.7 cavities compared to 1.76 in Quebec.

In the 12-19 age group, Ontario youths have 15.8 per cent fewer cavities than those in Quebec: 2.35 cavities compared to 2.79.



Details of the cavity rates in the two provinces have been compiled by Statistics Canada in a study it conducted recently into the health status of Canadians. Experts peered into the mouths of more than 5,000 Canadians from 2007 to 2009, tallying the number of cavities and teeth with filings, to try to get an idea of the state of oral health of the nation.

After a request from The Globe and Mail for a breakdown of the cavity rates by province, Statistics Canada tabulated the figures for Ontario and Quebec, where it said it had a sufficient number of people to be a representative sample.

Statscan said it couldn't compile meaningful data for British Columbia and Alberta, which are in a similar situation. British Columbia has practically no one drinking fluoridated water, while nearly three-quarters of Albertans rely on municipal supplies where the chemical is added.

The paper sought the information to see what light it would shed on the effectiveness of fluoridation, which has been touted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as one of the top 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century, and is endorsed by all dental associations in the country and by Health Canada.

But the results showed that if fluoridation is the only major difference between the two provinces, the chemical is preventing fewer than half a cavity per child in Ontario.

Health Canada down played the significance of the findings.

“While accurate,” the data on the children are “an incomplete picture of the tooth decay situation.... [and] cannot be used to form conclusions regarding the efficacy of fluoride use in water,” Health Canada said.

The federal department said firm conclusions can't be drawn from the Statscan survey because it didn't collect assessments on individual intakes of the chemical. To make a proper assessment, Health Canada said it would need detailed information on whether people in the two provinces differ in their intake fluoride supplements, drink tap water or bottled water, and use fluoridated toothpaste.

But fluoridation is one major and obvious difference between the provinces. More than three-quarters of Ontario residents live in areas where municipal water supplies contain the chemical. In Quebec, 94 per cent have water free of the additive, according to figures published by Health Canada in 2007.

Since then, Quebec City has voted to stop fluoridating, indicating that the difference between the two provinces is currently even more pronounced.

Some critics of fluoridation say the survey does raise questions about the practice.

“Fluoridation is no longer effective,” contends Hardy Limeback, head of the preventive dentistry program at the University of Toronto, who says adding the chemical to water is “more harmful than beneficial.”

Although fluoridation is touted as an unalloyed benefit by public health agencies, which estimate it cuts cavity rates by 20 per cent to 40 per cent, many community groups have sprung up across Canada lobbying to stop the practice, which is subject to repeal by local referendums. Some health professionals are worried fluoridation may have under-appreciated risks.

While fluoride toughens the outside of teeth to make them more resistant to bacteria-causing decay, a number of medical journal studies have linked exposure to altered thyroid function, and to reduced IQ levels in children, although the intellectual impairments were found at levels of the chemical in water well above those used for municipal supplies.

The most worrisome study, by Harvard researchers, appeared in 2006 in the journal Cancer Causes and Control and found that boys aged 7 exposed to high levels of fluoridated water were about four times more likely to develop childhood osteosarcoma. It's a rare bone cancer that felled Canadian icon Terry Fox and almost always leads to amputations.

There has also been a worldwide reduction in cavity rates, regardless of whether countries use the chemical, suggesting factors other than adding it to water supplies are at work.

One theory is that most people are already getting adequate exposure to fluoride through toothpastes, so the amounts in water aren't making much difference in tooth decay rates.

“The parallel reduction in caries [cavities] incidents in countries with a lot of fluoridation and countries with not much fluoridation is quite dramatic,” says Warren Bell, former head of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, a group that questions the practice.

Dr. Limeback said factors that might be preventing caries include increased exposure to vitamin D, better oral hygiene, less sugar consumption, and even antibiotics.

When fluoridation started 60 years ago, doctors thought swallowing the chemical was beneficial by strengthening teeth from the inside out. Dr. Limeback said more recent research shows that if there is a benefit, it is from the topical application of fluoride to the surface of teeth, which suggests that brushing with a toothpaste is more effective than drinking water containing the chemical.

Source:
theglobeandmail.com

Terry and Casey of WAC Brantford were honored to open for Dr. Paul Connett, on June 18 2010. At a town hall meeting in Brantford Ontario.
Dr. Connett is the director of the fluoride action network, and a retired (after 25 years) chemistry professor at the university of Canton New York.

Every city councilor was invited, as well as the employees of the Brant county health unit. Not one city councilor came, or no one from the health unit.

Here is the playlist of the video from the event.

These videos are from the May 25 2010 city council meeting. All speakers told council how bad of an idea water fluoridation is and how toxic fluoride is. Ultimately the council shot down the idea of ending the practice, or putting it to a vote. No surprise there, but this gave us another valuable tool to inform the people.


Here is the playlist for all 6 speakers.

We have been working very hard to have fluoride removed from our water supply. We have spoken at city council, were honoured to have Dr. Paul Connett do a town hall meeting, and are still to this day working on the petition.

Infowars.com has started a campaign called "there is posion in the tap water". We would like to take part in this campaign, but rather then using normal sized signs. Our idea is to have a billboard in our city. That would look something like this:




But we need your help. Funding for a project is quite high, and we have minimal financial support. Please help us make this a reality.
We do understand that times are hard for everyone, but even donations of $1 will add up.

Lets do this and bring awareness of what is in our water!!!

Natural News

Municipalities all across America are currently dripping fluoride chemicals into their public water supply, dosing over a hundred million Americans with a chemical that they claim "prevents cavities."

What's interesting here is that this biological effect of "preventing cavities" is a medical claim, according to the FDA. And as such, making this claim instantly and automatically transforms fluoride into a "drug" under currently FDA regulations.

This means that cities and towns all across America are now practicing medicine without a license by dripping liquid medication into the public water supply without the consent of those who are swallowing the medication.

If you or I did this, we would be arrested and tried as either terrorists (because contaminating the water supply is an act of terrorism) or felons practicing medicine without a license. So what allows cities and towns to get away with these very same crimes?

Cities openly violate state and federal law
Keep in mind that a medication can only be legally prescribed to someone after they have been diagnosed with a medical need. In other words, a doctor can't legally prescribe you some pharmaceutical unless he examines you and determines you actually need it. But fluoride is medicating everyone whether they need it or not, without any medical diagnosis whatsoever.

And that means those children or adults who already have high exposure to fluoride (from swallowing toothpaste or drinking fluoridated bottled water, for example) may now be exposed to too much fluoride from the added amounts in the tap water. Excess fluoride can cause serious health problems such as bone fractures and dark spots appearing on your teeth (dental fluorosis).

This does not appear to concern the proponents of fluoride -- people who believe they alone have the right to practice mass medicine without a license by dripping an unapproved drug chemical into the public water supply without the knowledge or consent of those who are being medicated by that chemical.

Every city and town in America currently engaged in fluoridation of the water supply is committing felony crimes. Town leaders who approve of water fluoridation are criminals operating in clear violation of FDA regulations, state medical laws and federal laws.

How to fight back
If you happen to see one of these town leaders at a town meeting, make a citizens' arrest and put them in handcuffs, then turn them over to the local sheriff.

You may also wish to write a strong letter to your state medical board and complain that your city or town officials are "practicing medicine without a license" by dosing your city residents with an unapproved drug.

If they insist fluoride is not a drug, tell them to read the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). (http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinform...)

There, you will find that the Act states:

The term "drug" means... articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.

Now, I don't personally agree with this definition of a "drug" but this is what the FDA claims it to be, and it clearly states that any item intended to "affect the structure" of the body is a drug.

Fluoride is intended to affect the structure of the teeth. That's the whole claimed purpose of dumping it into the water supply. Therefore, fluoride is a drug.

Furthermore, since it is a drug, it is ILLEGAL to dump it into the water supply, even if it were approved by the FDA to treat cavities (which it isn't).

Thus, every employee of every city or town that is currently dumping this chemical drug into the water supply is guilty of a felony crime and should be immediately arrested and prosecuted for contamination of the public water supplies as well as practicing medicine without a license.

Call your local police department and report these crimes. It's time to arrest these fluoro-terrorists who are illegally contaminating our public water supply with illegal drugs. Stop the fluoride madness.

"I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effects on a long range basis. Any attempt to use water this way is deplorable." - Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, Past President of the American Medical Association.

Natural News