Archive

Public Relations Versus Public Health
By Paul Connett
July 15, 2008

Thanks to Carol Kopf, FAN's media officer and campaign strategist, we have found out more about the public relations outfit hired by the ADA to push fluoridation. The company is Chlopak, Leonard, Schechter and Associates (CLS). From their own description of their work for the ADA it is apparent that CLS is working in 20 states to promote (mandatory?) fluoridation and fight off community efforts to stop fluoridation. They write:

"The American Dental Association (ADA), the professional association of dentists committed to the public's oral health, ethics, science and professional advancement, hired CLS in the summer of 2006 to address the multi-faceted public affairs and communications needs of state dental associations throughout the country. In particular, ADA asked CLS to focus on proactive efforts to deal with issues related to dental care access, restoratives and community water fluoridation."

Under the banner of the ADA's State Public Affairs Program, CLS currently manages efforts around multiple legislative issues in 20 targeted states through research, lobbying, advertising and media relations, guiding local communications firms and working with state dental societies. CLS helps each state society develop a legislative agenda to improve oral healthcare, build a coalition in support of that agenda, and advance it through outreach to elected officials and other decision makers. In addition, CLS provides rapid response support to help state societies successfully address adverse legislation and regulation." (my emphasis, PC)

But in addition to CLS, the ADA is supported by another - and more familiar - public relations outfit: the Oral Health Division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or CDC. Last week CDC launched another campaign to help its friends and directors at the ADA force fluoridation on the remaining American citizens who have escaped it so far. Not content with deceiving 184 million people on the "benefits" and "safety" of fluoridation, they seem hell bent on making sure that the other 80 million of us have this foolish practice forced upon us. Here are two phrases from a report issued in CDC's in-house organ Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report (MMWR), (July 11, 2008 / 57(27);737-741) on which the press release was based.

"Water fluoridation has been identified by CDC as one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century. The decline in the prevalence and severity of dental caries (tooth decay) in the United States during the past 60 years has been attributed largely to the increased use of fluoride (1)."

This is clearly designed to put a more recent date on the quote that the media and officials use so blindly. For superficial media coverage this phrase knocks out most statements from opponents. Very effective because used one on one, it give the pretense to journalists that they are doing their professional job of quoting both sides, while delivering a deadly blow to our side. For lazy officials it is a huge skirt behind which to hide their unwillingness to actually study the issue. "I am only a lowly bicycle salesman, who am I to challenge the 'authority' of the mighty CDC."

"Attainment of the Healthy People 2010 objective will require 1) recognition by policymakers and the public that dental caries remains an important public health problem and that fluoridation is an equitable and cost-effective method of addressing the problem, even in smaller populations where the per-capita cost of fluoridation is higher; 2) continuing science-based education of the public about the established safety of fluoridation; and 3) the political will to adopt new fluoridation systems in communities that are not served currently (10). To overcome the challenges facing fluoridation, public health professionals at the national, state, and local level will need to enhance their promotion of fluoridation and commit the necessary resources for equipment, personnel, and training." (my emphasis, PC)

These are clearly the marching instructions for those at the state level who are involved in dental health.

What is glaringly absent from both the CDC press release and the MMWR article is any reference to the NRC (2006) review - with its warnings that subsets of the population are already exceeding safe doses of fluoride - nor to the fact that the US EPA office of water after 28 months has not completed (have they even started?) the health risk assessment to determine a new safe drinking water goal for fluoride or MCLG (maximum contaminant level goal) as recommended by the NRC panel. Such a determination if done scientifically (don't hold your breath) would yield an MCLG less than 1 ppm and kill fluoridation overnight. Shouldn't state officials have been warned about this possibility? Shouldn't the serious scientific health issues related to over-exposure to fluoride as outlined in great detail in the NRC's massive 507-page review, have been communicated to those the CDC wishes to continue "science-based education of the public about the established safety of fluoridation"?

MMWR is more like a newsletter than a scientific journal. It is not externally peer-reviewed and as far as fluoridation is concerned it is more like an instruction manual to those who blindly serve CDC policy.

So with both the ADA and the CDC gearing up for a fresh onslaught we really have our work cut out for us. We may be looking at as many as another 20 mandatory fluoridation bills in the pipeline. We may even see a move for a national mandatory fluoridation bill. And even an international declaration! Look at this chilling phrase which emerged from a "Global Consultation on Oral Health Through Fluoride " jointly convened by the World Health organization (WHO), the FDI World Dental Federation (this organization has huge industrial financial support) and the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), held in Geneva, Switzerland and Ferney Voltaire in France, November 17-19, 2006. This joint meeting declared that "universal access to fluoride for dental health is a part of the basic human right to health."

So what can we do?

1) Clearly, our first priority is to get as many citizens activists and scientists to the Triple event in Toronto August 7-11. This will be a chance to meet and strategize with fluoridation fighters from Canada, the US, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the UK.

2) We need to increase the number of people signing the ONLINE message to Congress at http://congress.fluoridealert.org. We desperately need Congress to hold federal agencies accountable for the support they give to this practice, either by commission (CDC) and by neglect of due diligence (EPA and the FDA). We need Congressional Hearings to put these people under oath. Please circulate and ask all your friends and family members to sign on. We have been stuck in the 12,000's for several weeks. Ditto the Professionals' statement. Stuck in the 1700s.

There is no question that the promoters have the power, the influence and the money. But creativity can go a long way to outmaneuver the forces against us, especially when we know that the truth and the science is on our side. For example the moronic slogan being used in Arkansas newspapers (the ads are partially funded by the CDC!) in the first steps to get mandatory fluoridation in that state in 2009, is "Got Teeth, Get Fluoride." That slogan cost the promoters a lot of money. Here is our creative and FREE response: "Got Brains, Reject Fluoride." This coupe with all the documentation on fluoride's impact on the brain and the list of 18 studies indicating fluoride can lower IQ in children could make a stunning leaflet.

So what skills do you have that we could deploy creatively to help fight off this foolish practice? Are there any other retirees who are prepared to donate a large chunk of time to organizing locally, statewide, nationally or internationally? For those who are not retired, do any of you do a lot of international travel and can act as personal ambassadors to increase the human side of our networking?

1) CLS explains its contract with the ADA

The American Dental Association (ADA), the professional association of dentists committed to the public's oral health, ethics, science and professional advancement, hired CLS in the summer of 2006 to address the multi-faceted public affairs and communications needs of state dental associations throughout the country. In particular, ADA asked CLS to focus on proactive efforts to deal with issues related to dental care access, restoratives and community water fluoridation.

Under the banner of the ADA's State Public Affairs Program, CLS currently manages efforts around multiple legislative issues in 20 targeted states through research, lobbying, advertising and media relations, guiding local communications firms and working with state dental societies. CLS helps each state society develop a legislative agenda to improve oral healthcare, build a coalition in support of that agenda, and advance it through outreach to elected officials and other decision makers. In addition, CLS provides rapid response support to help state societies successfully address adverse legislation and regulation.

At the national level, CLS oversees an ongoing national research project to help ADA better communicate to the general public about dentistry and oral health issues. CLS has helped the ADA respond to federal agency regulatory actions, third-party statements opposing ADA positions, and developments in scientific research affecting ADA's oral health recommendations.

With CLS's help, the State Public Affairs Program has had many successes thus far. In the area of increased access to dental care, CLS worked with state dental societies to successfully add adult dental care to Missouri's new Medicaid program and achieve the first increase to Connecticut's dental Medicaid coverage in nearly 20 years. In the restoratives area, CLS worked with the New Mexico Dental Association to develop an education program encouraging their members to adopt environmentally sound best management practices in dealing with dental office wastewater. And CLS worked with the Maine Dental Association to block efforts that would have ended community water fluoridation in Bangor, the state's third largest city.

- - -

2) The CDC Press release (July 10, 2008):

Community Water Fluoridation Now Reaches Nearly 70 percent of U.S. Population

For Immediate Release
July 10, 2008

Contact: CDC?s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Communication,
770-488-5131

Community Water Fluoridation Now Reaches Nearly 70 percent of U.S. Population

Nearly 70 percent of U.S. residents who get water from community water systems now receive fluoridated water, according to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The proportion of the U.S. population receiving fluoridated water, about 184 million people, increased from 65.8 percent in 1992 to 69.2 percent in 2006, said the study in this week?s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports.

"Community water fluoridation is an equitable, cost-effective, and cost-saving method of delivering fluoride to most people," said Dr. William Maas, director of CDC?s Division of Oral Health. "We?ve seen some marked improvements; however, there are still too many states that have not met the national goal. The national goal is that 75 percent of U.S. residents who are on community water systems be receiving fluoridated water by 2010."

Fluoride, a naturally occurring compound in the environment, can reduce or prevent tooth decay. Adding or maintaining tiny levels of fluoride in drinking water is a safe and effective public health measure to prevent and control tooth decay (dental caries). The second half of the 20th century saw a major decline in the prevalence and severity of dental caries, attributed in part to the increasing use of fluoride. Based upon studies and a systematic review, the U.S. Task Force on Community Preventive Services reported that fluoridation resulted in a median 29.1 percent relative decrease in tooth decay.

The report, "Populations Receiving Optimally Fluoridated Public Drinking Water-United States 1992-2006," provides the most recent information on the status of fluoridated water by state. The report says the percentage of people served by community water systems with optimal levels (which are defined by the state and vary based on such things as the climate) of fluoridated water ranged from 8.4 percent in Hawaii to 100 percent in the District of Columbia. Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia have met or exceeded national objectives, while 25 states need improvements. Three states (Colorado, Delaware and Nebraska) that previously reached the national objective dropped below the target by 2006.

During 1998-2006, CDC developed the Water Fluoridation Reporting System (WFRS), a Web-based method to support management of state fluoridation programs and to collect these data. The state has administrative oversight on water fluoridation and CDC relies on state dental or drinking water programs to provide fluoridation data, including populations served, fluoridation status, fluoride concentration, and fluoride source for individual community water systems.

For more information on fluoridation and oral health, please visit www.cdc.gov/oralhealth.