A collection of Critiques of the York Review
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.
Connett, 2000: Paul Connett (external link - opens in a new window)
Meiers 30th Oct 2000: Peter Meiers (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
York 2.1, Feb/Mar 2001: Chris Holdcroft
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