[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
."20The aluminum company summarized the medical evidence that justifiedoverturning the guilty verdict.Edward Largent's human experiments at theKettering Laboratory showed that fluoride was SHOWDOWN IN THE WEST 175safe in moderate doses, the company asserted.Without mentioning thatit had helped to pay for the research, Reynolds argued that, because theKettering scientist had eaten so much fluoride himself, it therefore"proved the harmlessness of the Martins' exposure." After ingestingsome 3,000-4,000 milligrams of fluorine over four years, "Mr.Largenthad experienced none of the Martin's symptoms or any othersymptoms," claimed Reynolds'And, perhaps for the first time in an American courtroom, the FluorineLawyers unveiled a brand new strategy, pointing to the fed eralgovernment's endorsement of the safety of water fluoridation and the fadfor adding fluoride to toothpaste as evidence that industrial fluoridepollution could not possibly have been responsible for the alleged injury. Fluorine Lawyers andGovernment Dentists"A Very Worthwhile Contribution"Although big corporations have long used the U.S.government'smedical assurances about fluoride safety to defend themselves influoride-pollution cases, no collaboration between industry and thefederal promotion of fluoride has ever been acknowledged.However,Robert Kehoe's papers show precisely such collusion, detailing how thefluoride research of the National Institute of Dental Research, ostensiblyconducted to prove water fluoridation "safe," was covertly performed inconcert with industry, which was aware that the medical data would helptheir Fluorine Lawyers battle American pollution victims and workers incourt.THE REYNOLDS METALS Company employed a legal strategyduring the Martin case that would become a staple in Americancourtrooms.Five years had elapsed since the Federal Security Agencyadministrator, Oscar Ewing, the former Alcoa lawyer, had endorsedpublic water fluoridation on behalf of the Public Health Service, whichwas under the FSA's jurisdiction.During the 1955 Martin trial in Portland,Reynolds reminded the court of fluoride's "beneficial" effects.Fluoride was being added to toothpaste, and 15,000,000 Americansnow consumed more fluoride through their drinking water than theMartins had been exposed to, Reynolds's attorneys said."This court hasthus found to be `poisonous' an amount of fluorine FLUORINE LAWYERS AND GOVERNMENT DENTISTS 177which scientific and judicial opinion has unanimously found harmless,""Reynolds's lawyers argued.The only thing not explained is how theMartins could have suffered injury from something harmless to the rest ofmankind," they added)Robert Kehoe also understood how public water fluoridation helpedindustry.His endorsement was featured in the profluorida-tion booklet,Our Children's Teeth.That booklet was simultaneously distributed to NewYork parents and to the judges on the Martin Appeals Court.' "The questionof the public safety of fluoridation is non-existent from the viewpoint ofmedical science," he assured parents and judges alike.'Privately, however, Kehoe was not so sure."It is possible that cer taininsidious and now unknown effects are induced by the absorption offluorides in comparatively small amounts over long periods of time," hehad told industry in 1956.4 And in 1962 Kehoe told Reynolds's medicaldirector, James McMillan, that there remained "a basic questionconcerning the non-specific effects of prolonged exposure to apparentlyharmless quantities of fluoride ( this by the way is the thing on whichGeorge Waldbott bases his entire campaign against fluoridation)."5Kehoe and his Kettering Laboratory continued to soldier for waterfluoridation during the 1950s and 1960s, assailing fluorida-tion critics as"windbags and windmills." Kettering toxicologists Francis Heyroth andEdward Largent were prominent members of National Academy ofSciences panels that endorsed fluoridation.And in 1963 the KetteringLaboratory published an influential bibliography of the medical literaturefavoring fluoridation, entitled The Role of Fluoride in Public Health: TheSoundness of Fluoridation in Communal Water Supplies.Kehoe saw how fluoride safety studies performed by government dentalresearchers helped his industry patrons in court.Farmers and workerswould have a much harder time successfully suing corporations forfluoride pollution if the U.S.Public Health Service had performed its ownstudies and then vouched for the chemical's safety."The results of such[dental] investigations are highly advanta geous," Kehoe explained to the"corporations sponsoring his fluoride work at Kettering, in that the`problem [of proving' fluoride safe] exists outside of industry,thereby involving situations in which the CHAPTER FOURTEEN178economic factors tend to be of different type and significance than thosewhich are often alleged to be active in the industrial world, and ofteninvolving investigators who are not subject to accusations of bias based onindustrial associations.'Kehoe approached the Public Health Service in April 1952 on behalf ofthe industries sponsoring his fluoride research, to ask that the health agencyperform additional fluoride safety studies.' "I was requested by the group[of industries], for whom I have acted as a spokesperson and chairman, inthe consideration of this work, to approach your division of the U.S.PublicHealth Service, with the idea of determining whether or not an investigationof that type might not be conduced by the Service," Kehoe wrote to Dr.Seward Miller.'Government proved cooperative.The top medical investigator at theNational Institute of Dental Research, Dr.Nicholas Leone, was especiallyhelpful.In August 1955, for example, during the Martin trial, the publicservant Dr.Leone spoke with a senior attorney for Reynolds, TobinLennon, who also was a member of the Fluorine Lawyers Committee,directing Lennon to a federal safety study on fluoride that Leone hadrecently concluded in Texas.No record could be found of anyone from this U.S.government agencyever helping the Martin family.Leone's study had examined people living in two Texas towns, wherethere were different amounts of natural fluoride in the water supply.Thetown of Bartlett had between 6 and 8 parts per million in its water, whilenearby Cameron had 0.4 ppm.Dr [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl trzylatki.xlx.pl
."20The aluminum company summarized the medical evidence that justifiedoverturning the guilty verdict.Edward Largent's human experiments at theKettering Laboratory showed that fluoride was SHOWDOWN IN THE WEST 175safe in moderate doses, the company asserted.Without mentioning thatit had helped to pay for the research, Reynolds argued that, because theKettering scientist had eaten so much fluoride himself, it therefore"proved the harmlessness of the Martins' exposure." After ingestingsome 3,000-4,000 milligrams of fluorine over four years, "Mr.Largenthad experienced none of the Martin's symptoms or any othersymptoms," claimed Reynolds'And, perhaps for the first time in an American courtroom, the FluorineLawyers unveiled a brand new strategy, pointing to the fed eralgovernment's endorsement of the safety of water fluoridation and the fadfor adding fluoride to toothpaste as evidence that industrial fluoridepollution could not possibly have been responsible for the alleged injury. Fluorine Lawyers andGovernment Dentists"A Very Worthwhile Contribution"Although big corporations have long used the U.S.government'smedical assurances about fluoride safety to defend themselves influoride-pollution cases, no collaboration between industry and thefederal promotion of fluoride has ever been acknowledged.However,Robert Kehoe's papers show precisely such collusion, detailing how thefluoride research of the National Institute of Dental Research, ostensiblyconducted to prove water fluoridation "safe," was covertly performed inconcert with industry, which was aware that the medical data would helptheir Fluorine Lawyers battle American pollution victims and workers incourt.THE REYNOLDS METALS Company employed a legal strategyduring the Martin case that would become a staple in Americancourtrooms.Five years had elapsed since the Federal Security Agencyadministrator, Oscar Ewing, the former Alcoa lawyer, had endorsedpublic water fluoridation on behalf of the Public Health Service, whichwas under the FSA's jurisdiction.During the 1955 Martin trial in Portland,Reynolds reminded the court of fluoride's "beneficial" effects.Fluoride was being added to toothpaste, and 15,000,000 Americansnow consumed more fluoride through their drinking water than theMartins had been exposed to, Reynolds's attorneys said."This court hasthus found to be `poisonous' an amount of fluorine FLUORINE LAWYERS AND GOVERNMENT DENTISTS 177which scientific and judicial opinion has unanimously found harmless,""Reynolds's lawyers argued.The only thing not explained is how theMartins could have suffered injury from something harmless to the rest ofmankind," they added)Robert Kehoe also understood how public water fluoridation helpedindustry.His endorsement was featured in the profluorida-tion booklet,Our Children's Teeth.That booklet was simultaneously distributed to NewYork parents and to the judges on the Martin Appeals Court.' "The questionof the public safety of fluoridation is non-existent from the viewpoint ofmedical science," he assured parents and judges alike.'Privately, however, Kehoe was not so sure."It is possible that cer taininsidious and now unknown effects are induced by the absorption offluorides in comparatively small amounts over long periods of time," hehad told industry in 1956.4 And in 1962 Kehoe told Reynolds's medicaldirector, James McMillan, that there remained "a basic questionconcerning the non-specific effects of prolonged exposure to apparentlyharmless quantities of fluoride ( this by the way is the thing on whichGeorge Waldbott bases his entire campaign against fluoridation)."5Kehoe and his Kettering Laboratory continued to soldier for waterfluoridation during the 1950s and 1960s, assailing fluorida-tion critics as"windbags and windmills." Kettering toxicologists Francis Heyroth andEdward Largent were prominent members of National Academy ofSciences panels that endorsed fluoridation.And in 1963 the KetteringLaboratory published an influential bibliography of the medical literaturefavoring fluoridation, entitled The Role of Fluoride in Public Health: TheSoundness of Fluoridation in Communal Water Supplies.Kehoe saw how fluoride safety studies performed by government dentalresearchers helped his industry patrons in court.Farmers and workerswould have a much harder time successfully suing corporations forfluoride pollution if the U.S.Public Health Service had performed its ownstudies and then vouched for the chemical's safety."The results of such[dental] investigations are highly advanta geous," Kehoe explained to the"corporations sponsoring his fluoride work at Kettering, in that the`problem [of proving' fluoride safe] exists outside of industry,thereby involving situations in which the CHAPTER FOURTEEN178economic factors tend to be of different type and significance than thosewhich are often alleged to be active in the industrial world, and ofteninvolving investigators who are not subject to accusations of bias based onindustrial associations.'Kehoe approached the Public Health Service in April 1952 on behalf ofthe industries sponsoring his fluoride research, to ask that the health agencyperform additional fluoride safety studies.' "I was requested by the group[of industries], for whom I have acted as a spokesperson and chairman, inthe consideration of this work, to approach your division of the U.S.PublicHealth Service, with the idea of determining whether or not an investigationof that type might not be conduced by the Service," Kehoe wrote to Dr.Seward Miller.'Government proved cooperative.The top medical investigator at theNational Institute of Dental Research, Dr.Nicholas Leone, was especiallyhelpful.In August 1955, for example, during the Martin trial, the publicservant Dr.Leone spoke with a senior attorney for Reynolds, TobinLennon, who also was a member of the Fluorine Lawyers Committee,directing Lennon to a federal safety study on fluoride that Leone hadrecently concluded in Texas.No record could be found of anyone from this U.S.government agencyever helping the Martin family.Leone's study had examined people living in two Texas towns, wherethere were different amounts of natural fluoride in the water supply.Thetown of Bartlett had between 6 and 8 parts per million in its water, whilenearby Cameron had 0.4 ppm.Dr [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]