York

For the UK, this was supposed to be the 'review' to end all Reviews. In a sense, it was. But the cost was outrage and anger at the contrived way the pro-fluoride lobby manipulated the finding to suit their own crusade. Findings were 're-interpreted', conclusions contrived, science abused, and above all, the entire process was manipulated to protect the pro-fluoride lobby.

The Review was turned into a circus. The independent ringmaster was outnumbered by the clowns, the trapeze artists and the lion-tamers. It is they who really ran the show from behind the scenes, and it is they who made sure that the entire process would one one damage limitation and misrepresentation.

Ergo, the York Review presented us with a layman's view of how to prevent the real truth from seeing the light of day. A stitch-up by anyone's measure, and an insight to how the establishment will always try to deceive the general public.

Not a great day for science, integrity, honesty or fair-play.

Content

Critiques

Connett, 2000: Paul Connett (external link - opens in a new window)

York 1.1, 21st Apr 2000: Chris Holdcroft

York 1.2, Mar/Apr 2001: Glen Walker

York 1.3, Jul/Aug 2001: Chris Holdcroft

Emails

York 2.1, Feb/Mar 2001: Chris Holdcroft

News

York 3.1, 29th May 1999: The Guardian

York 3.2, 11th Oct 2000: Press Release #003

York 3.3, 27th Jan 2001: Financial Times

York 3.4, 15th Feb 2001: Dentistry

York 3.5, May/Jun 2001: Glen Walker

York 3.6, 16th Jun 2001: BMJ

Notes

Contributions from:

Bruce Spittle (Critique, 3rd May 2000);

A Burghstahler (Critique, 25th Jun 2000);

Andreas Schuld (Letter, 2000);

R. Ziegelbecker (Letter, 5th Aug 2000);

... are no longer available. However, should they be located at any time in the future, they shall be reinstated accordingly.

Next Page: York 1.1

FLUORIDATION FACTS

Also: fluoride.ga, .gq, .ml & fluoridation.cf, .ga,.gq, .ml, .tk.

SCIENCE SECTION

Folders

York

ITEM HERE