Colin and Russel crash land on planet fluoride

It seems that New Zealand Conservative Party leader Colin Craig is the candidate who just keeps on giving. He is “undecided” if planes are flying overhead and spraying mind control chemicals (chemtrails for those of you oblivious to the New World Order), “not sure” whether NASA have landed on the moon, and thinks fluoridation is dangerous and mass medication. He has been ridiculed relentlessly by tweeters and the media. The left will no doubt make an issue of Craig’s more alternative perspectives in 2014, but for some issues it could be an issue of pots calling the kettle black, or Green.

In April the Green Party adopted their new health policy, which includes the following:

[Source: https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/health-policy]

The Greens want Councils to enable residents to “opt-out” of having fluoride, and seem supportive of the Anti-Fluoride Brigade arguments of dental fluorosis and mass medication. Just to be clear, this has nothing to do with whitening strips, we received a few confused emails about this.

Historically the Greens have supported local referenda to decide the issue  an idea sure to be popular with binding referendum fan Colin Craig. While Labour has recently shown how a policy process driven by members can be very positive (see the Policy Platform), the Greens are showing their policy, like that of the Conservatives, is developed by a party of conspiracy theorists.

Perhaps the Conservative Party and the Greens have more in common than expected and we could see an anti-science coalition. While David Cunliffe was quick to rule out working with Colin Craig after yesterday morning’s moon landing fiasco, if he’s in a bind come 2014, it would seem the Greens and the Conservatives might have more in common than he might expect…

4 thoughts on “Colin and Russel crash land on planet fluoride”

  1. What the hell is planet fluoride?
    I wonder how anyone can come to a sensible decision on fluoride when all that’s available is misinterpreted material on DHBs websites such as the 1999 York report and EU SCHER committee material. Unless the basis of an argument is transparent and honest then any conclusion arrived at will be less than ideal. That is where the debate on fluoride is at and why so much energy and space is being wasted.
    Both sides need to reach a point where they agree on what they agree on and then go forward from that point. Chem. trails and men on the moon are not relevant to a sensible dialogue in the fluoride issue.

  2. Another cop out by the greens . . . if it’s not safe to spread it on the land or exhaust it into the air it’s certainly not safe to add it to public water supplies . . . they should make a stand and not sell out as they did over GE.

  3. Another cop out by the greens. If highly toxic hydrofluosilicic acid is not safe to spread on land or exhaust to the air it is certainly not safe to add to the public water supply. They should be making a firm stand against this poison and not be selling out as they did with GE. Disappointing.

  4. Greenbuzzer may be woefully ignorant of the chemistry involved but the US Surgeon General, the Royal Society, public health authorities planet-wide and every scientific organisation on the planet are not.
    In the context of public water supplies, at a neutral ph, hydrofluosilicic acid dissociates completely when added to water . On other words, it ceases to exist. Left behind are harmless chemicals and the fluoride anion. This anion, beneficial to dental health, is in a concentration that is safe non-toxic and similar to that found in many natural water supplies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

eight + 15 =