Dr. F. B. Exner is a prominent Seattle radiologist and one of the foremost opponents of the fluoridation movement in North America. He is co-author of the antifluoridation work, "The American Fluoridation Experiment", by Exner, Waldbott and Rorty.
Last year, the Ontario government set up the "Ontario Fluoridation Investigating Committee" with three members. This committee opened public hearings in Toronto on May 2 of this year, which hearings were scheduled to run for two weeks.
Represented at these hearings were delegates for anti-fluoridation, or "Pure Water", organizations from such cities of Ontario as Toronto, Ottawa and Kingston. Dr. Exner was invited to appear at the Toronto hearings on behalf of these groups. He accepted.
On the afternoon of Monday, May 9, Dr. Exner sat in on the hearing at Toronto, listening to the statement of evidence. On Tuesday, May 10, he actively participated in support of the anti-fluoridation argument.
However, as it turned out, Dr. Exner was not to have as much time at his disposal to present the anti-fluoridation case as he had expected. On the afternoon of Tuesday, May 10, he received an urgent summons to appear in Chicago to support, with his evidence, the injunction suit restraining the City of Chicago from the fluoridation of the city's public water supply.
That same Tuesday afternoon, in Chicago, Dr. H. Trendley Dean, "the father of fluoridation", had testified for the city of Chicago in support of the fluoridation. The cross-questioning of Dean had been postponed until the following Friday. Dr. Exner was urgently needed to assist the council for the anti-fluoridationists.
In view of this sudden turn of events Dr. Exner arranged to have his 36 page presentation, with slides, made on Wednesday, May 11, in Toronto. Dr. Exner speaks of this presentation as follows:
"The procedure in the hearings was to hear six topics in order, each topic to be completed before the next was commenced. They were:
Sub-heads under each category made the agenda less restrictive than would appear. However, an integrated statement was impossible, and there was no place in the outline for many of the more important considerations.
To make matters worse, the arrangement made it necessary for anyone who wanted to speak on all six categories to be present the entire time, which was expected to be somewhere between two and six weeks... Under the circumstances it seemed that the only solution for me was to present my material under the sixth category, which was described as including questions of personal rights, freedom of choice, compulsion and the moral, legal and philosophical implications of adding such materials to a municipal water system. It seemed to me that anything important in the preceding categories could be discussed in terms of its moral and political implications.
I prepared a 36 page written presentation, calculated to take about 50 minutes. In it I discussed fluoridation as a manifestation of the conflict between paternalism and individualism (totalitarianism and "democracy"), and specially:
The conflicting philosophies as they bear on water supply function and practice, and the larger implications of fluoridation. The moral limitations on human experimentation, specifically as set forth by Pope Pius XII, and in the Nuremberg Principles. The violations of principle in the fluoridation experiments were discussed.
The necessity of free and informed consent and the right of the subject to complete and honest information were discussed, and the violations of principle in the fluoridation experiments were presented. Specific misrepresentations by the fluoridators were presented, and specifically the misrepresentations relating to the amount, severity, and significance of the anticipated poisoning, and the actual appearance of "mottled enamel'.
Numerous slides were shown to illustrate the actual appearance of different classifications of severity; and photographs of - the material from the slides were included in the copies as submitted.
'The moral implications of contributory causation were discussed and the example wherein fluorine poisoning of industrial or dietary origin is aggravated by fluorine added to the water.
The moral obligations of the expert employed by a layman were discussed, and specifically the duty "to possess and to exercise with due diligence such skill and knowledge as he may reasonably, be expected to possess as a prerequisite to accepting his employment."
The implications of this duty were discussed in connection with the "endorsements" by physicians, dentists, scientists and their respective organizations; and also in connection with the failure of the "scientific research groups" employed by the committee.
The reports of the "research groups" were analyzed to show wherein the authors had failed to exercise due diligence to provide the committee with reliable information.
The role of the U.S. Public Health Service as the fountainhead of dishonest fluoridation propaganda was noted.
And finally, the political implications of the rights of the individual under a free government were discussed...
...on Wednesday afternoon, I presented my 36-page presentation and the slides. Afterward I was questioned by the counsel for the committee, and by its members and also by citizens who were present."
Dr Exner then goes on to recount briefly his trip to Chicago and the appearance he made before the investigators there:
"I flew to Chicago Wednesday night and on Thursday listened to the testimony and helped (slightly) with the questioning of Dr. Doty from the ADA. Then Mr. Dilling and I spent most of the night and till hearing-time on Friday preparing to question Dr. Dean.
The questioning of Dr. Dean continued throughout Friday and, in my opinion, was an event of critical historic importance. The case for fluoridation is now completely unmasked and discredited by the sworn admissions of the leading promoter; and the claims and accusations in "The American Fluoridation Experiment" by Exner, Waldbott and Rorty, are completely validated insofar as they apply to anything based on the work of Dean, and largely confirmed as to the Public Health Service generally. The entire basis of the fluoridation promotion is thus effectively destroyed...
Meanwhile you should be aware of the existence of this new testimony. You can safely warn any advocate of fluoridation that the ground has been out under his position; and that anything he says without having read Dr. Dean's testimony is likely to prove acutely embarrassing in the very near future."
It is hoped that in the not-too-distant future this paper will be able to supply to its readers the pertinent extracts of the hearing in Chicago.
From Mrs. Mildred A. Mott, chairman of the Kingston Pure Water Committee, we received a copy of the following communiqué. We might also add that it was through the kindness and thoughtfulness of Mrs. Mott that we were able to publish the extracts above of the communiqué of Dr. Exner. Here is Mrs. Motts communiqué in toto.
Historic event escapes press notice
When Dr. H. Trendley Dean, "Father of Fluoridation" was cross-questioned on May 13 in the injunction proceedings to halt fluoridation of Chicago water, the entire "scientific basis" of water fluoridation was shattered. This is the report of Dr. F. B. Exner, Seattle radiologist who was in Chicago to help attorney Kirkpatrick Dilling with the questioning.
The direct testimony of Dr. Dean had been heard on Tuesday, May 10, before Mayer Goldberg, master in chancery, hearing the evidence. Dr. Dean's cross-examination which lasted all-day Friday, began in Master Goldberg's crowded office, and adjourned at noon to the court-room of Judge Bicek.
No reporters were present, and Dr. Dean's testimony which cut the ground completely from wind under the entire fluoridation promotion, went without notice from the Chicago news media and the nation's press.
The "fluoride-dental caries hypothesis" which led to the fluoridation experiments at Grand Rapids, Michigan; Newburgh, New York; Brantford, Ontario and elsewhere, and the claim that fluoridation is "safe", have been based on studies by Dr. Dean and his co-workers. These were carried out prior to 1941, while Dr. Dean was an officer in the (U.S.) Public Health Service.
The May 13 testimony of Dr. Dean reveals for all to see, the errors, the shortcomings and the fallacies in these basic studies; and confirms in detail the charges which have been brought by the leading opponents of fluoridation. Particularly it confirms the analysis by Dr. Exner. in his chapters of the book "The American Fluoridation Experiment."
According to Dr. Exner, There will be some mighty red faces in very high places when this testimony is published. Those who have accepted fluoridation on faith from the Public Health Service and lent their names and prestige to its promotion, will have some tall explaining to do."
Dr. Dean's complete testimony, with foreword and annotations by Dr. Exner, will be publish as a separate pamphlet by Devin-Adair (New York) and will also appear as an appended chapter in the new printing of "The American Fluoridation Experiment", which is now due.
The American Dental Association, a chief promoter of fluoridation, is already aware of this testimony Mr. Bernard J. Conway,representing the A.D.A., has been assisting City Attorney Kafka of Chicago, in the defense of the case and was present during the testimony.
*
The Union of Electors will be happy to lay before its readers whatever pertinent parts of this testimony it may judge will be useful to them in their combat against the movement to fluoridate community public water supplies, at such times as the testimony referred to above becomes available.
E. MASSECAR
Subscribe