5 Jul 2011

Daily Echo SOAPBOX

SOAPBOX: Fluoride
The public has a right to know
PROFESSOR John Newton, Regional Director of Public Health, was the SHA's principle adviser on fluoridation.
His remit demands that he keep up with the latest evidence in order to protect communities from known and avoidable health risks.
He must not approve measures known to cause potential harm or disadvantage to significant vulnerable subsections of the community. Nor must he subject people to enforced treatment linked to chronic and even life-threatening diseases. Despite this imperative, he chose to ignore the precautionary principle and advised the SHA to implement fluoridation - a policy of indiscriminate and uncontrolled mass medication using a medically unlicensed product.
The Risk / Benefit Equation does not apply where the recipient has no choice, ie where medication comes through the tap. He was fully informed, but clearly ignored the adverse findings of the York Review, and the peer reviewed evidence of world experts. Many consider John Newton to be personally accountable as the power behind fluoridation. They blame him for not instructing the SHA adequately regarding much significant research, including links with thyroid and kidney disease, brittle bone disease, a lowering of IQ in children in fluoridated areas, and a five to seven-fold increase in bone cancer in young boys.
Did he present this evidence to the SHA as he was clearly required to do? If so, why did they ignore it?
At the Decision Hearing, Professor Newton was asked: "Given the official advice that infants should not drink fluoridated water or have formula mixed with it, what arrangements have you made for delivering fluoride free water to young families and other vulnerable groups?" The Professor replied: "We advise young mothers to breastfeed." The audience was outraged. At a stroke, he had discriminated against women unable to breastfeed through illness or circumstance - and by implication - had admitted it was harmful to give infants fluoridated water. With the demise of Breastfeeding Awareness Week, what is his position now? The question he refused to answer then, still remains. Does he advise women who can't breastfeed to risk their children's health by giving them fluoridated water? Or should they follow official advice and use unfluoridated water? If the latter, he needs to instruct Southern Water accordingly.
The public has a right to know his plan before this toxic waste starts coming through our taps.

'An insult to people who deserve better'
OLGA Senior should certainly know that the people do not want fluoride in their drinking water coming out of their taps.
Is she really so interested in the children of this area? Or maybe as Mr Spinner of Calmore has brought to light: 'we are faced with costs because of this hexafluorosilicic acid coming from a chemical waste from factories who are no doubt thrilled to think they can be paid for this danger to our drinking water.'
Imagine, people of this area, you are exposed now to WASTE being put into your water. This is outright preposterous.
Our councillors should probably better protect us against folly, not act as if the SHA can dictate its desires. I think it is quite evident from the press and mass media in general that this fluoride is not wanted in our water.
So, able councillors, protect us, fight for us. We pay enough taxes to be better treated!
I consider this whole matter an insult to the people who deserve better.
Those "children" can surely get supplies of fluoride elsewhere rather than in everyone's drinking water. OK, Mrs Senior, improve dental health, don't ruin our pure water supply

No comments: