York Review

[2001] THE GREATEST "SCIENTIFIC" FLUORIDE FRAUD YET?

[2001] The Flaw in the Fluoridation Statistics by Dan Montgomery

[2000] The system of fluoridation and mind control endangers your health and your freedom by Dan Montgomery As expected certain sections of the media are trumpeting the York Review as showing that fluoridation is effective and safe. Nothing could be further from the truth. If one goes beyond the spin in the accompanying press release "The Final Word on Fluoride" from the NHS Centre for Reviews & Dissemination, University of York (CRD) and actually visits the scientific detail of the report, there is - even with all its many limitations -a clear evidence that water fluoridation has been a massive, and potentially dangerous, failure.

[2000] Does water fluoridation have negative side effects? A critique of the York Review by Peter Meiers In summary, the York review fits well in a history of attempts to downgrade possible risks associated with expo-sure to fluoride. Selection of data, inconsistent use of exclusion criteria, disregard of experimental studies which could have offered a clue to proper evaluation of epidemiological investigations render the York review useless. Either the York team was not really interested (to say the least), aimed at supporting proponents´ views, or was hopelessly lost in its task.

The York Report was commissioned by the England health department to review fluoridation claims by analyzing hundreds of existing studies. Unfortunately, it's results were so distorted by the British Medical Society that the Chairman of the report had to issue a public statement to correct their blatant "misstatements."
Letter of the Chairman clarifying what the report actually said.
A comparison of what the York Report said vs. what the British Dental Assoc. (BDA) and British Medical Assoc. (BMA) claimed
London Financial Times commentary on the controversy.
York Report Summary
York Report - full document (110 pages 500k PDF file)