FW: Libertarians! The time has come to Get the Fluoride Out! www.fluorideout.org

Activists List
1

Right on, Marcy! I agree this is a worthwhile cause for us to support. Thanks for responding and adding it to our events listing. Can you, Aubrey, Les, and Denny formally vote to endorse it, if this has not already happened?

  I don't have a strong position regarding the scientific merits of fluoridation, or lack thereof, but am skeptical to say the least. More fundamentally, I think the burden of proof should be on those who want to add chemicals to the drinking water supply to prove that it is beneficial to public health, and so far I definitely don't see them as having made that case. I'm not sure how much fluoridation is costing taxpayers, but I'm pretty sure there's some cost, and even if it *were* a boon to health, this would constitute a subsidy that goes beyond the proper role of government (probably more a subsidy to fluoride producers than to the public).

  So I've put the event on my calendar, and look forward to attending.

  Clint and Jonathan, once you have our formal support which I hope is pending, will you be able to add the Libertarian Party of San Francisco as a sponsor to any outreach materials (website, fliers, etc.) you are doing for this event? What event production/promotion needs do you have? I'd be interested in being added to the speaker lineup on behalf of our group. Basically I would just explain the libertarian take on the issue as briefly presented above from a non-scientific perspective, stressing the issues of freedom of choice and no subsidies. I would also be willing to MC the event if desired. I'm somewhat well known in San Francisco, at least among those who follow politics, having run five times for local office and appeared as the author of many ballot arguments in the voter handbook. In 2010, SF Weekly named me "Best Political Activist/Bisexual Escort" (see http://www.sfweekly.com/bestof/2010/award/best-political-activist-bisexual-escort-1983701/ ). I'm also an elected leader in the Libertarian Party at the state and national levels.

Love & Liberty,
                                  ((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian Party of California
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
                                (415) 625-FREE

2

Handle this issue with care.

Fluoridation is something that was instituted without any scientific
study, based on supposed benefits, and recent studies have shown some harm.

However, opposition to fluoridation is a popular shorthand for nutcase
conspiracy theorist positions; see Gen. Ripper in _Dr. Strangelove_ for
a popular example, and the position popularly assigned to the John
Birchers that fluoridation is a Communist plot to brainwash us.

In particular: (a) Do not make any scientific statements unless you are
a scientist and the statement is within your area of expertise, or
unless you are citing peer-reviewed literature (and include the
citation). For example — not to pick on Marcy — that fluoride comes
from fluorine, which is harmful, is a complete canard; as well say that
table salt, whose components are a flammable metal and a poisonous gas,
is therefore necessary harmful. (Pure oxygen is pretty dangerous, too.)
(b) Always make sure you spell fluoride with U-O. (Spell-checkers will
help with this, but in debates around science, any sign of ignorance or
sloppy thinking is ammunition for your opponents.)

The CDC has a page on the topic, <URL: http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/

, which while pro-fluoridation, has some decent resources, including

their revision to the recommended levels at <URL:
http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110107a.html >; I don’t know
how SF compares, but many municipal water supplies still fluoridate over
these levels.

The moral issues are stronger ground for Libertarians, that even if an
effective medication, decisions should be made by individuals, not
imposed by government fiat. (FWIW, I grew up with well water, and used
fluoride toothpaste, chewable fluoride tablets, and a fluoride rinse (at
school!) and have excellent teeth — but these doses are controlled, the
toothpaste and rinse are not taken internally, and the adults in my
house did not follow the same regimen as the children.)

~Chris

3

I could not agree more!! This subject is worse than global warming, with facts lacking all around. If we choose to get involved, I agree with Chris that simply stating the moral ground is best. We have enough tin foil in our discussion list, and don't need any more by getting involved in conspiratorial stances on fluoride.

Marcy

Handle this issue with care.

Fluoridation is something that was instituted without any scientific
study, based on supposed benefits, and recent studies have shown some harm.

However, opposition to fluoridation is a popular shorthand for nutcase
conspiracy theorist positions; see Gen. Ripper in _Dr. Strangelove_ for
a popular example, and the position popularly assigned to the John
Birchers that fluoridation is a Communist plot to brainwash us.

In particular: (a) Do not make any scientific statements unless you are
a scientist and the statement is within your area of expertise, or
unless you are citing peer-reviewed literature (and include the
citation). For example â€" not to pick on Marcy â€" that fluoride comes
from fluorine, which is harmful, is a complete canard; as well say that
table salt, whose components are a flammable metal and a poisonous gas,
is therefore necessary harmful. (Pure oxygen is pretty dangerous, too.)
(b) Always make sure you spell fluoride with U-O. (Spell-checkers will
help with this, but in debates around science, any sign of ignorance or
sloppy thinking is ammunition for your opponents.)

The CDC has a page on the topic,

  >, which while pro-fluoridation, has some decent resources, including

their revision to the recommended levels at

  http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110107a.html >; I don’t know

4

Good advice, as usual, Chris. But fluoridation could be an interesting and important issue for just that reason. As far as I can tell, the Bircher claim that fluoridation was a Communist conspiracy was what got the whole concept of “conspiracy theory” started. But popular opinion has shifted impressively on that issue in recent years. A possible outcome of success in the anti-fluoridation campaign is the implication that crackpot conspiracy theories are not necessarily to be dismissed out of hand, and perhaps some weakening of trust in government on public health issues more generally.

image001.jpg

image003.jpg

5

Hello, Starchild. I thank you for writing. I have been traveling in Brazil and so I'm a little slow in replying. I would like to talk with you on the phone today or soon. Would you be available later?

-Clint

6

Also, Skype: clintgriess

7

Hi Clint,

  My apologies for the delay getting back in touch with you (I know you called me). My Skype hasn't been working, not sure what's wrong and haven't gotten around to resolving the problem. I just tried calling you on both the numbers I have for you, but don't know if you'll get the message I left (the other number just said it was a Skype user who couldn't be contacted), so I'm sending this email too. Feel free to call me back when you get a chance.

Love & Liberty,
                                 ((( starchild )))

8

Thanks for calling! If video conversation by skype or google+ is not an option, please send me some times tomorrow that would work for me to call, and I will get back to you with a confirmation. (Please note that I am 5 hours ahead of SF.)

-Clint

9

Thanks, Clint. I have a fairly irregular schedule. Are there some times you will be at a phone where you can receive calls? Five hours ahead of SF -- where are you, btw?

Love & Liberty,
                                 ((( starchild )))