• Skip to main content
ppLogo
  • Featured Content
    • Journal of Health and Healing
    • Blog
    • Thrive in 65
    • Recipes
    • Digital ContentNEW
    • Community Events
  • Research
  • Food Freedom Project
  • Resources
  • Shop
    • Store
    • Digital ContentNEW
    • Product Guide
  • Find a Practitioner
  • About us
    • Vision & Mission
    • Our History
    • Our Printed Journal
    • Leadership
    • Contact Us
Donate
Become a member
header_login_icon-2
Login
cartLogo

Want to read the full Journal?

Join
Price-Pottenger

Access to all articles, new health classes, discounts in our store, and more!

See Member Benefits

Already a member? Log in here

Editorials, Letters: Fluoridation View Criticized

Granville F. Knight, MD / July 7, 1975

Letter to the Editor published in Evening Outlook, July 7, 1975.

* * *

Editor: Even though I know the pressures to which newspaper editors must be subjected by fluoridation proponents, I was greatly disappointed to have the Evening Outlook come out in support of Proposition F before the recent election. Fortunately, enough Los Angeles citizens heard information which made them question the wisdom of voting mass medication of themselves through the water supply. Your editorial support for Proposition F was particularly surprising since the Santa Monica City Council about 2½ years ago, after one evening of hearings, soundly defeated an attempt to fluoridate our water supply.

The recent letter to the editor by Supervisor Edelman was typical of the arrogance shown by those who would do away with the citizen’s freedom of choice. In this letter, he stated, “Unfortunately, the council later retreated after unfounded and irrational attacks on fluoridation by a few misguided and uninformed opponents and decided to place the issue before the voters.” This is known as argumentum ad hominem, or in plain English, “if you have no satisfactory answers, attack the speaker.” It might further be characterized by a common saying, “My mind’s already made up; don’t confuse me with facts.”

Artificial fluoridation of community water supplies is completely unscientific. It is a violation of free choice. It is totalitarian. It shows no regard whatsoever for the allergic and chronically ill individuals who are bound to be made ill from it and this amounts to at least 1 per cent of the population.

It shows no concern for the fact that our environment is becoming increasingly contaminated by fluorides in the air, water and food. It scarcely seems to be scare tactics to try and tell the public that in cities that have been fluoridated for 30 years, the instance of stroke and heart disease is mounting rapidly over that of the average community and that the number of cancer cases in these cities are also increasing disproportionately.

It has been my experience that when given the facts, the people have enough common sense to protect themselves. When scientists disagree, it is better to go slow.

ppWhiteLogo
twitterWhiteLogo
instagramWhiteLogo
facebookWhiteLogo
youtubeWhiteLogo

Featured Content
Blog
Recipes
Thrive in 65
Journal of Health & Healing
Research Archives

Learn
Traditional Diet
What Should I Eat?
Courses
Find a Practitioner

About Us
Vision & Mission
Our History
Leadership
Contact Us

Store
Shop
Cart

Account
Join Us
Member Login

Copyright © 2022 Price – Pottenger 1-800-366-3748 | 619-462-7600 | A 501(c)3 nonprofit organization | Tax ID# 95-6104419

User Agreement

Privacy Policy