Thursday, 30 June, 2011 - 09:07
The Ruapehu-Taumarunui District Council confirmed their decision to stop fluoridation in Taumarunui. The Council decided to stop fluoridation in the district's only fluoridated town after hearing submissions from the public and overseas expert, Professor Emeritus Paul Connett. Taumarunui had been fluoridated for over 30 years.
Fluoride Action Network applauds the councillors for being open minded enough to listen to new evidence and then acting to protect the health, wellbeing and rights of its residents.
Fluoride is linked to a multitude of adverse health effects including hip fractures, increased bone fractures, thyroid problems and immune dysfunction. A review of published research since 1992 published this month in Neurologia concludes "The prolonged ingestion of fluoride may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system?.Fluoride is capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier, which may cause biochemical and functional changes in the nervous system during pregnancy, since the fluoride accumulates in brain tissue before birth.
As a result of the Annual Plan process, Upper Hutt City council also resolved to lobby Wellington Regional to stop fluoridation. Upper Hutt City councillors also heard from Prof Paul Connett, whereas other councils such as Wellington City refused.
"The decisions made by councillors in Taumarunui and Upper Hutt are proof that once people allow themselves to listen, to all the evidence on fluoridation, and not just what the Ministry of Health espouse, that it becomes obvious that fluoridation is ineffective, harmful and a violation of basic human rights" says Mary Byrne, spokesperson for Fluoride Action Network New Zealand.
"It is high time all remaining councils that have fluoridation (now only 25 out of 69), actually examine the issue for themselves instead of blindly relying on bureaucrats from the MOH to do their thinking for them" says Ms Byrne.
29 Jun 2011
New Zealand - Anderton calls for levy on sugary drinks
Anderton calls for levy on sugary drinks28/06/2011 6:00:00
Progressive MP Jim Anderton
By Nina Burton
If Jim Anderton gets his way, sugary drinks will no longer be cheaper than milk.
The Progressive MP is calling for a levy on sugar laden soft drinks to help pay for the country's dental care.
He says as well as dental decay, new research shows New Zealand has some of the highest rates of diabetes in the world.
Jim Anderton says Coca Cola is the number one best seller in supermarkets, and that's a big part of the problem.
He says it's no surprise around 3,000 kids under five are having operations to remove rotting teeth.
Mr Anderton says a little prevention is a better alternative to a lot of costly treatment once the damage has been done.
Good Idea.
Daily Echo letter - A battle we were never going to win
A battle we were never going to win
SO, the SHA has legally won the battle to add fluoride to Southampton, Eastleigh and Totton's public water supply.
Well, the SHA was never going to lose this battle because of its armour, i.e. Statutory Instruments (SI) 921.
I asked the SHA in April 2009 what was its power, and it sent me a copy of SI 921, which basically stated that the outcome of any consultation that opposes the consultation's intention can be ignored simply because we, the 'consulted upon', lack the educational knowledge to be able to reach an educated opinion.
This therefore means we have lost our case at the first hurdle.
As far as I can see, drinking fluoridated water may even cure ingrowing toenails, yet until this has been scientifically proven we can never be sure.
The outcome of any consultation based upon the above Statutory Instrument will always win the day.
As I have previously stated hi my letter to the Echo in February 2011, it is this legal document's wording that has to be altered. Now SI 921 has been accepted by the highest court in our land as being legally secure, whether we consider its wording morally unjust or not.
Meyrick Gough, water quality and strategy manager at Southern Water (Letters, June 16), basically states that Southern Water is only following orders from the SHA in line with another Statutory Instrument 920.
The very next day we all learn the verdict that the fluoridation of Southampton's water via Southern Water's facilities will take place within months.
Was this a case of 'don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger'?
My worry now is that as the power to implement these two Statutory Instruments will pass over to local councils, then our council's approach may well be to continue hi the SHA's footsteps.
Will our Southampton Council reassure me that it will not allow this fluoridation process to take place?
I fail to understand why Southampton Council's vote to accept fluoride into Southampton residents' public water supply seems so easily accepted by our neighbouring councils without so much as an 'On your bike, Southampton' comment.
Maybe these councils will now speak up to protect their residents' opinions.
JOHN POPE, Woodmill, Southampton.
SO, the SHA has legally won the battle to add fluoride to Southampton, Eastleigh and Totton's public water supply.
Well, the SHA was never going to lose this battle because of its armour, i.e. Statutory Instruments (SI) 921.
I asked the SHA in April 2009 what was its power, and it sent me a copy of SI 921, which basically stated that the outcome of any consultation that opposes the consultation's intention can be ignored simply because we, the 'consulted upon', lack the educational knowledge to be able to reach an educated opinion.
This therefore means we have lost our case at the first hurdle.
As far as I can see, drinking fluoridated water may even cure ingrowing toenails, yet until this has been scientifically proven we can never be sure.
The outcome of any consultation based upon the above Statutory Instrument will always win the day.
As I have previously stated hi my letter to the Echo in February 2011, it is this legal document's wording that has to be altered. Now SI 921 has been accepted by the highest court in our land as being legally secure, whether we consider its wording morally unjust or not.
Meyrick Gough, water quality and strategy manager at Southern Water (Letters, June 16), basically states that Southern Water is only following orders from the SHA in line with another Statutory Instrument 920.
The very next day we all learn the verdict that the fluoridation of Southampton's water via Southern Water's facilities will take place within months.
Was this a case of 'don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger'?
My worry now is that as the power to implement these two Statutory Instruments will pass over to local councils, then our council's approach may well be to continue hi the SHA's footsteps.
Will our Southampton Council reassure me that it will not allow this fluoridation process to take place?
I fail to understand why Southampton Council's vote to accept fluoride into Southampton residents' public water supply seems so easily accepted by our neighbouring councils without so much as an 'On your bike, Southampton' comment.
Maybe these councils will now speak up to protect their residents' opinions.
JOHN POPE, Woodmill, Southampton.
28 Jun 2011
Southampton Daily Echo - letters
Stop passing the buck, SW
DEAR me, Southern Water's Meyrick Gough (Letters, June 16) seems a trifle fidgety at the idea of customers writing to them about the fluoride issue, reminding them that there is a great deal more to it than the mere observance of the lifeless letter of dubious legislation.
Southern Water has ample scope for objecting to the demand to fluoridate. It should do so in regard to its reputation as a company, to start with.
No one can trust the managers of a business who, on being told by an interfering body having no connection with that business to downgrade their product, are prepared to agree without putting up a fight.
There are also the moral obligations to its customers whom it charges directly for its services. This includes the assurances of quality held out in company literature.
In 2005 Southern Water encouraged people to take part in any consultation and let the health authority know their views. At that time Southern Water apparently believed the consultation genuine, and that the views of the population would matter. It now knows that the people's views were ignored.
On that basis alone it has good grounds to refuse to comply with the SHA's 'request'. In 2005 Southern Water stated that the purpose of consultation was "to ensure that customers living in
the affected areas are in favour".
In 2003 Southern Water had expressed its understanding of the situation in these terms: "Before dosing can go ahead, the health authority must make sure there is a majority of people living in the area who are in favour". On its own account, it stated: "A full indemnity from the health authority is required in the event of any claim being made against Southern Water as a result of dosing fluoride".
It added: "We would want to see a clear majority of our customers in favour". The required indemnity is an indication of the recognition of potential risks.
Just what kind of legislation provides protection for the offenders and none for their
victims? No wonder people believe Southern Water has questions to answer.
Regardless of the feasibility of controlling dosage at the start, which can never be foolproof, there is absolutely no control over the amount taken in by the recipients. For over 15 years Southern Water has hidden behind the buck-passing plea that it cannot judge the medical aspects. Why not? A responsible organisation would have investigated these during that period. Yet it is prepared to add this pollutant to our most vital supply regardless.
G PAYNE, Southampton.
A Euro appeal?
I AM not a fan of the European Human Rights Act, but surely it contravenes one of the basic human rights to have one's health endangered and essential, life-giving water poisoned by the addition of harmful substances such as fluoride. How about appealing to the European courts? MRS V DAVIS, Highbridge.
Make Government take notice...
I HAVE had an idea that just might stop this fluoride business
once and for all. Should all those who oppose the introduction of this to the water supply in Southampton refuse to take water from the city's supply by shutting the stopcocks to the properties, so the properties would be declared unfit for human habitation, this only needs to be done for long enough to get the Government involved. They would have to give in and stop the process.
Gandhi did this civil disobedience thing which changed the way the world thinks, so why not try it in Southampton? Your help to get people to stand together would defeat this SHA which I understand is to be disbanded very shortly.
DAVID BALDWIN, Southampton.
DEAR me, Southern Water's Meyrick Gough (Letters, June 16) seems a trifle fidgety at the idea of customers writing to them about the fluoride issue, reminding them that there is a great deal more to it than the mere observance of the lifeless letter of dubious legislation.
Southern Water has ample scope for objecting to the demand to fluoridate. It should do so in regard to its reputation as a company, to start with.
No one can trust the managers of a business who, on being told by an interfering body having no connection with that business to downgrade their product, are prepared to agree without putting up a fight.
There are also the moral obligations to its customers whom it charges directly for its services. This includes the assurances of quality held out in company literature.
In 2005 Southern Water encouraged people to take part in any consultation and let the health authority know their views. At that time Southern Water apparently believed the consultation genuine, and that the views of the population would matter. It now knows that the people's views were ignored.
On that basis alone it has good grounds to refuse to comply with the SHA's 'request'. In 2005 Southern Water stated that the purpose of consultation was "to ensure that customers living in
the affected areas are in favour".
In 2003 Southern Water had expressed its understanding of the situation in these terms: "Before dosing can go ahead, the health authority must make sure there is a majority of people living in the area who are in favour". On its own account, it stated: "A full indemnity from the health authority is required in the event of any claim being made against Southern Water as a result of dosing fluoride".
It added: "We would want to see a clear majority of our customers in favour". The required indemnity is an indication of the recognition of potential risks.
Just what kind of legislation provides protection for the offenders and none for their
victims? No wonder people believe Southern Water has questions to answer.
Regardless of the feasibility of controlling dosage at the start, which can never be foolproof, there is absolutely no control over the amount taken in by the recipients. For over 15 years Southern Water has hidden behind the buck-passing plea that it cannot judge the medical aspects. Why not? A responsible organisation would have investigated these during that period. Yet it is prepared to add this pollutant to our most vital supply regardless.
G PAYNE, Southampton.
A Euro appeal?
I AM not a fan of the European Human Rights Act, but surely it contravenes one of the basic human rights to have one's health endangered and essential, life-giving water poisoned by the addition of harmful substances such as fluoride. How about appealing to the European courts? MRS V DAVIS, Highbridge.
Make Government take notice...
I HAVE had an idea that just might stop this fluoride business
once and for all. Should all those who oppose the introduction of this to the water supply in Southampton refuse to take water from the city's supply by shutting the stopcocks to the properties, so the properties would be declared unfit for human habitation, this only needs to be done for long enough to get the Government involved. They would have to give in and stop the process.
Gandhi did this civil disobedience thing which changed the way the world thinks, so why not try it in Southampton? Your help to get people to stand together would defeat this SHA which I understand is to be disbanded very shortly.
DAVID BALDWIN, Southampton.
27 Jun 2011
USA - #1 Untreated Disease in Children
#1 Untreated Disease in Children
Monday, June 13, 2011 at 09:30AM
Dental caries (tooth decay) is the number one untreated disease in children, 5 times more common than asthma.
Each year, 52 million school hours are missed due to dental-related issues. Untreated tooth decay leads to problems with learning, sleeping, eating and growing. Nearly 80 percent of childhood tooth decay occurs in 20 percent of children.
Nationwide, 30 to 50 percent of 4- and 5-year-olds in Head Start already have tooth decay. Surprisingly, the number of children getting cavities is increasing; low-income individuals are disproportionately affected by dental disease and most do not have access to dental care.
IN Ohio there are several community organizations are addressing this problem:
This happens in mainly fluoridated USA
Monday, June 13, 2011 at 09:30AM
Dental caries (tooth decay) is the number one untreated disease in children, 5 times more common than asthma.
Each year, 52 million school hours are missed due to dental-related issues. Untreated tooth decay leads to problems with learning, sleeping, eating and growing. Nearly 80 percent of childhood tooth decay occurs in 20 percent of children.
Nationwide, 30 to 50 percent of 4- and 5-year-olds in Head Start already have tooth decay. Surprisingly, the number of children getting cavities is increasing; low-income individuals are disproportionately affected by dental disease and most do not have access to dental care.
IN Ohio there are several community organizations are addressing this problem:
This happens in mainly fluoridated USA
26 Jun 2011
Fluoridation Protest
This is where the proposed fluoridation injection site will be and our protest in 2008.
Natural minerals help to cure arthritis
Natural minerals help to cure arthritis
by S. C.
.............Medical science has been proven that Mineral deficiencies are associated with several arthritic conditions, minerals are often overlooked as a needed supplement in the treatment of arthritis. In Ancient time people used minerals for their health benefits and healing properties for hundreds of generations. Bone is composed of many minerals in differing proportions - calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, sodium, sculpture, potassium, zinc, manganese, copper, silicon, stronium, boron. Boron helps other minerals to incorporate into the bony matrix. Another contributor to arthritis is Fluoride. We have fluoride added to our water so we can't avoid it.* Mottling of the teeth is a sign of too much fluoride. At the same time fluorosis of the skeletal bones occurs. Boron is the natural in activator of fluoride. Sugar requires phosphorous for its metabolism. Phosphorous is removed from the bone to metabolize these common foods where processing has removed many of the original minerals. Magnesium is needed for calcium absorption. Without enough magnesium, calcium can collect in the soft tissues and cause one type of arthritis.
*USA and 10% of the UK
by S. C.
.............Medical science has been proven that Mineral deficiencies are associated with several arthritic conditions, minerals are often overlooked as a needed supplement in the treatment of arthritis. In Ancient time people used minerals for their health benefits and healing properties for hundreds of generations. Bone is composed of many minerals in differing proportions - calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, sodium, sculpture, potassium, zinc, manganese, copper, silicon, stronium, boron. Boron helps other minerals to incorporate into the bony matrix. Another contributor to arthritis is Fluoride. We have fluoride added to our water so we can't avoid it.* Mottling of the teeth is a sign of too much fluoride. At the same time fluorosis of the skeletal bones occurs. Boron is the natural in activator of fluoride. Sugar requires phosphorous for its metabolism. Phosphorous is removed from the bone to metabolize these common foods where processing has removed many of the original minerals. Magnesium is needed for calcium absorption. Without enough magnesium, calcium can collect in the soft tissues and cause one type of arthritis.
*USA and 10% of the UK
25 Jun 2011
Southampton Set for Fluoride Tap Water
Southampton Set for Fluoride Tap Water
After a long legal challenge, Southampton is set to have fluoride added to its tap water. The decision has been fought every step of the way by many locals, lead by a local resident, Geraldine Miller. The appeals were rejected however and the plan has been given the go ahead.
The decision to put fluoride in tap water will affect around 200,000 residents in Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams. It was decided that fluoride would be put into the water system of the area because of its links to oral health. Fluoride is a key ingredient in toothpastes and has proved to better the dental health of citizens when it has been introduced into the water system in other places, the residents of Southampton originally appealed against the scheme because of the affect it will potentially have on the environment, but it has become more than that.
The plan was first suggested back in 2008 and the company responsible, South Central Strategic Health Authority, voted unanimously for the go ahead before residents had been given a full chance to speak out about it and continued with the plans even after initial complaints were made.
Geraldine Miller has been quoted as saying, “It’s so undemocratic. I don’t think they’ve assessed either side properly.”
As such the hearing has become more ethical and democratic than about the fluoridated water, which would only prove harmful to a person in unrealistically high quantities.
Other councils around the country have been patiently waiting the outcome of the feud before suggesting fluoridating their own water and while some residents remain disgruntled about the proceedings, the fluoride levels in Southampton are set be raised in an as of yet undisclosed number of months.
The British Dental Association supports the plan to add the chemical and the entire episode will perhaps bring about similar change in other local councils.
Have they never heard of fluorosis? The fight to stop this is not over yet
After a long legal challenge, Southampton is set to have fluoride added to its tap water. The decision has been fought every step of the way by many locals, lead by a local resident, Geraldine Miller. The appeals were rejected however and the plan has been given the go ahead.
The decision to put fluoride in tap water will affect around 200,000 residents in Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams. It was decided that fluoride would be put into the water system of the area because of its links to oral health. Fluoride is a key ingredient in toothpastes and has proved to better the dental health of citizens when it has been introduced into the water system in other places, the residents of Southampton originally appealed against the scheme because of the affect it will potentially have on the environment, but it has become more than that.
The plan was first suggested back in 2008 and the company responsible, South Central Strategic Health Authority, voted unanimously for the go ahead before residents had been given a full chance to speak out about it and continued with the plans even after initial complaints were made.
Geraldine Miller has been quoted as saying, “It’s so undemocratic. I don’t think they’ve assessed either side properly.”
As such the hearing has become more ethical and democratic than about the fluoridated water, which would only prove harmful to a person in unrealistically high quantities.
Other councils around the country have been patiently waiting the outcome of the feud before suggesting fluoridating their own water and while some residents remain disgruntled about the proceedings, the fluoride levels in Southampton are set be raised in an as of yet undisclosed number of months.
The British Dental Association supports the plan to add the chemical and the entire episode will perhaps bring about similar change in other local councils.
Have they never heard of fluorosis? The fight to stop this is not over yet
24 Jun 2011
Lymington Times - Anti-fluoride campaign loses High Court legal challenge
Anti-fluoride campaign loses High Court legal challengeA CAMPAIGN group fighting against fluoride being added to Southampton's water supply, which will affect 8,000 Totton residents, has lost its High Court bid to stop it.
The South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) gave its approval in 2009 for the chemical to be added to the area's supply after the city's primary care trust said it was needed to combat child tooth decay.
The plan affects 190,000 people around Southampton, including 8,000 Totton residents because of the layout of the pipes.
A two-day legal challenge was heard in the High Court earlier this year but last week the judge rejected a final appeal against the decision not to allow a judicial review.
Opponents had claimed SHA bosses failed to properly assess key arguments against the proposals before giving them their unanimous backing.
Despite this, members of Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) say they plan to step up their campaign.
HAF chairman Stephen Peckham said: "The SHA has shown that not only is it willing to ignore the evidence, but it continues to act in defiance of the wishes of local people and democratically elected local councils and MPs.
"The government is passing decision-making powers from the SHA to local authorities to ensure that there is more accountability — a concept that seems lost on the unelected SHA board."
The group plans to lobby Southampton City Council with a 6,000 signature petition to urge the council to formally reverse its original endorsement of fluoridation.
A spokesperson for the group added: "The councils in the affected areas must come together as they will have responsibility for fluoridation when the SHA is abolished next year.
"A statement indicating that the city council will eventually turn off the fluoride supply will send a powerful message to the SHA. If they still insist on buying the equipment and developing the dosing stations, then
they will be accountable at some time in the future for purposely wasting public money."
A spokesperson for the SHA told the 'A&T' it was "pleased" the legal process had been concluded following the High Court judgment.
She added: "Throughout this time the SHA board has remained satisfied that water fluoridation at one part per million is a safe and effective way to tackle tooth decay in the area, and that the health benefits outweighed all other arguments against water fluoridation, including the level of support and opposition.
"The process of adding fluoride to the water in Southampton and south-west Hampshire will now continue as planned. It is likely to be several months before the necessary plant and machinery are constructed, operational, and ready to commence the process of adding fluoride to the water supply."
During consultation 72% of responses were against fluoridation, but a Mori poll for the SHA showed only 38% opposed, compared with 32% in support.
Vitamin D deficiency causes boy's rotting teeth
Vitamin D deficiency causes boy's rotting teeth
23rd Jun 2011
Harvey Wesley has been brought up on a healthy diet, eating his quota of five a day and organic foods (fresh fruit and veg, fish, or meat).
Sweets were a very rare treat. Harvey's mum started him brushing his teeth, twice daily, from 6 months old with a baby brush. When he was old enough he maintained a strict regime, brushing up to 4 times a day depending on the types of food or drink he was consuming.
He suffered severe pain in his teeth, at just seven years old and went for a check-up at his local dentist.
Harvey's mother was shocked at how deep the hole in his teeth was.
The dentist told her to 'stop feeding him sweets' and repaired the hole.
A year and a half later, he returned to the same dentist to have the hole refilled, but during treatment was screaming out in agony.
The dentist discovered a second cavity on the other side of his mouth. Harvey is now 9 years old and has four very deep fillings.
Harvey's mum was shocked at what was going on inside his mouth.
As such a healthy, happy young boy, she knew it wasn't a result of his diet, or dental care.
She started looking up symptoms online and began thinking Harvey might be deficient in something. Harvey's Mum discovered that a lack of vitamin D can have a direct impact on the health of bones and teeth.
Although she was feeding Harvey a diet rich in calcium with foods like eggs, fish, and milk, she wondered if this was enough.
She ordered a Vitamin D testing kit from Betteryou.uk.com and four weeks later received the results - only to discover Harvey was found to be severely deficient, with a shocking level of 19nmol/litre . Harvey's now taking BetterYou's oral vitamin D supplementation to top up essential levels in his body.
Vitamin D
Vitamin D deficiency has been known for causing severe rickets in young children, but research suggests the bigger story right now is tooth decay, which results in more than 36,000 children admitted to hospital every year!
So many mums are worrying about their children not brushing their teeth properly, or whether they're eating too many sweets.
But do they worry about a lack of vitamin D?
Vitamin D supplementation goes hand-in-hand with good healthy teeth and have launched the world's first oral DLux 1000 vitamin D3 spray.
Vitamin D levels are at our lowest in spring after a winter lacking in natural sunlight, so now is the time to top up.
Statistics
• More than 36,000 children are admitted to hospital every year with tooth decay
• More than 50% of adults in the UK are vitamin D deficient
• Tooth decay is the third most common reason for hospital admission in children
• Calcium alone doesn't increase bone mass density in children – unless vitamin D is also given
So not lack of fluoride then.Too much covering up from the benefit of the sun for fear of skin damage?
23rd Jun 2011
Harvey Wesley has been brought up on a healthy diet, eating his quota of five a day and organic foods (fresh fruit and veg, fish, or meat).
Sweets were a very rare treat. Harvey's mum started him brushing his teeth, twice daily, from 6 months old with a baby brush. When he was old enough he maintained a strict regime, brushing up to 4 times a day depending on the types of food or drink he was consuming.
He suffered severe pain in his teeth, at just seven years old and went for a check-up at his local dentist.
Harvey's mother was shocked at how deep the hole in his teeth was.
The dentist told her to 'stop feeding him sweets' and repaired the hole.
A year and a half later, he returned to the same dentist to have the hole refilled, but during treatment was screaming out in agony.
The dentist discovered a second cavity on the other side of his mouth. Harvey is now 9 years old and has four very deep fillings.
Harvey's mum was shocked at what was going on inside his mouth.
As such a healthy, happy young boy, she knew it wasn't a result of his diet, or dental care.
She started looking up symptoms online and began thinking Harvey might be deficient in something. Harvey's Mum discovered that a lack of vitamin D can have a direct impact on the health of bones and teeth.
Although she was feeding Harvey a diet rich in calcium with foods like eggs, fish, and milk, she wondered if this was enough.
She ordered a Vitamin D testing kit from Betteryou.uk.com and four weeks later received the results - only to discover Harvey was found to be severely deficient, with a shocking level of 19nmol/litre . Harvey's now taking BetterYou's oral vitamin D supplementation to top up essential levels in his body.
Vitamin D
Vitamin D deficiency has been known for causing severe rickets in young children, but research suggests the bigger story right now is tooth decay, which results in more than 36,000 children admitted to hospital every year!
So many mums are worrying about their children not brushing their teeth properly, or whether they're eating too many sweets.
But do they worry about a lack of vitamin D?
Vitamin D supplementation goes hand-in-hand with good healthy teeth and have launched the world's first oral DLux 1000 vitamin D3 spray.
Vitamin D levels are at our lowest in spring after a winter lacking in natural sunlight, so now is the time to top up.
Statistics
• More than 36,000 children are admitted to hospital every year with tooth decay
• More than 50% of adults in the UK are vitamin D deficient
• Tooth decay is the third most common reason for hospital admission in children
• Calcium alone doesn't increase bone mass density in children – unless vitamin D is also given
So not lack of fluoride then.Too much covering up from the benefit of the sun for fear of skin damage?
Daily Echo - SHA not 'arrogant' over fluoride debate
SHA not 'arrogant' over fluoride debate
I WAS disappointed to read the letter in the Daily Echo headed SHA Arrogance on Fluoride (Letters, June 11), in which Ms Scarborough asserts that the SHA "stated that the result of the public consultation on fluoridation was overruled because the public is too ignorant to hold a valid opinion."
Ms Scarborough further states that this "preposterous notion was openly revealed" in my letter published nearly two years ago in the Echo (July 27 2009), where she claims that I have suggested "that the public does not understand the complex health issues" (regarding fluoridation).
I made no such claim. Neither would the SHA be arrogant enough to insult the intelligence of more than 10,000 individuals who contributed to the fluoride consultation.
The purpose of my letter was to clarify the SHA's position, and highlight the considerable amount of information relating to fluoride which is available from a variety of sources, and which presents a sizable
challenge when evaluating either side of the fluoride argument.
This is empathy not arrogance; demonstrating an understanding of the difficulty we all face when evaluating complex scientific information, and especially so when considering important issues such as delivering improved dental health outcomes for the children of Southampton and south west Hampshire.
OLGA SENIOR, director of communications and corporate affairs, South Central Strategic Health Authority.
She may not have actually said we are too ignorant to evaluate the facts but they certainly are arrogant with their we know best what is good for you.
I WAS disappointed to read the letter in the Daily Echo headed SHA Arrogance on Fluoride (Letters, June 11), in which Ms Scarborough asserts that the SHA "stated that the result of the public consultation on fluoridation was overruled because the public is too ignorant to hold a valid opinion."
Ms Scarborough further states that this "preposterous notion was openly revealed" in my letter published nearly two years ago in the Echo (July 27 2009), where she claims that I have suggested "that the public does not understand the complex health issues" (regarding fluoridation).
I made no such claim. Neither would the SHA be arrogant enough to insult the intelligence of more than 10,000 individuals who contributed to the fluoride consultation.
The purpose of my letter was to clarify the SHA's position, and highlight the considerable amount of information relating to fluoride which is available from a variety of sources, and which presents a sizable
challenge when evaluating either side of the fluoride argument.
This is empathy not arrogance; demonstrating an understanding of the difficulty we all face when evaluating complex scientific information, and especially so when considering important issues such as delivering improved dental health outcomes for the children of Southampton and south west Hampshire.
OLGA SENIOR, director of communications and corporate affairs, South Central Strategic Health Authority.
She may not have actually said we are too ignorant to evaluate the facts but they certainly are arrogant with their we know best what is good for you.
22 Jun 2011
More evidence of harm
More evidence of harm
Effects of the fluoride on the central nervous system
L. Valdez-Jiméneza, C. Soria Fregozoa, , , , M.L. Miranda Beltránb, O. Gutiérrez Coronadob and M.I. Pérez Vegaa
New research just published
Abstract
Introduction
Fluoride (F) is a toxic and reactive element, and exposure to it passes almost unnoticed, with the consumption of tea, fish, meat, fruits, etcetera and articles of common use such as: toothpaste additives; dental gels, non-stick pans and razor blades as Teflon. It has also been used with the intention of reducing the dental cares.
Development
Fluoride can accumulate in the body, and it has been shown that continuous exposure to it causes damaging effects on body tissues, particularly the nervous system directly without any previous physical malformations.
Background
Several clinical and experimental studies have reported that the F induces changes in cerebral morphology and biochemistry that affect the neurological development of individuals as well as cognitive processes, such as learning and memory. F can be toxic by ingesting one part per million (ppm), and the effects they are not immediate, as they can take 20 years or more to become evident.
Conclusion
The prolonged ingestion of F may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system. Therefore, it is important to be aware of this serious problem and avoid the use of toothpaste and items that contain F, particularly in children as they are more susceptible to the toxic effects of F.
Effects of the fluoride on the central nervous system
L. Valdez-Jiméneza, C. Soria Fregozoa, , , , M.L. Miranda Beltránb, O. Gutiérrez Coronadob and M.I. Pérez Vegaa
New research just published
Abstract
Introduction
Fluoride (F) is a toxic and reactive element, and exposure to it passes almost unnoticed, with the consumption of tea, fish, meat, fruits, etcetera and articles of common use such as: toothpaste additives; dental gels, non-stick pans and razor blades as Teflon. It has also been used with the intention of reducing the dental cares.
Development
Fluoride can accumulate in the body, and it has been shown that continuous exposure to it causes damaging effects on body tissues, particularly the nervous system directly without any previous physical malformations.
Background
Several clinical and experimental studies have reported that the F induces changes in cerebral morphology and biochemistry that affect the neurological development of individuals as well as cognitive processes, such as learning and memory. F can be toxic by ingesting one part per million (ppm), and the effects they are not immediate, as they can take 20 years or more to become evident.
Conclusion
The prolonged ingestion of F may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system. Therefore, it is important to be aware of this serious problem and avoid the use of toothpaste and items that contain F, particularly in children as they are more susceptible to the toxic effects of F.
20 Jun 2011
How much sugar should one eat a day?
How much sugar should one eat a day? By Dr Luisa Dillner /London
Sugar is hard to resist and our consumption of it has increased relentlessly. Last week, research from the Universities of Bristol and Bangor, published in the journal Appetite, showed that drinking two sugary drinks a day makes us crave even sweeter food and drink.
What is sugar?
A loose term covering a class of carbohydrates that includes sucrose, (from sugar cane or sugar beets), lactose (milk sugar) and fructose (fruit sugar). Refined sugar – of the kind you put in your tea – is made up of a molecule of glucose combined with a molecule of fructose. Fructose is twice as sweet as glucose.
Is sugar bad for you?
The sugar industry says that there are no bad foods. It also argues, forcefully, that sugar does not provide empty calories, a charge laid against it by nutritionists who say that the refining process strips out and bleaches sugar, removing vitamins, minerals and other nutrients. Although it can’t argue that sugar is full of goodness, it says that people who eat sugar do not seem to be vitamin or mineral deficient. Which isn’t quite the same thing. What no one can argue about is that sugar causes tooth decay....................
19 Jun 2011
Alaska - Fairbanks - fluoride gone
FLUORIDE GONE: The last of the fluoride added to the Golden Heart Utilities system should be out of the system by now, the utility says. The fluoride hopper was empty as of Wednesday and it probably took a couple of days before the water no longer contained the additive.
With the removal of fluoride, the “pH” level of the water will increase somewhat, just slightly above the recommended levels suggested by the federal government. The normal range is 6.5 to 8.5, but the pH is expected to be about 8.55 without added fluoride, she said.
That means the water would be slightly more alkaline than recommended. The pH standard is not a requirement.
Tiffany Van Horn, director of administration for Golden Heart, said the company does not expect that consumers will notice any change in the water as the pH will be barely above the recommended range. The company is not required to make any changes to reduce the pH level, but it will wait and see before deciding if additional processing is needed.
From NaturalNews.com
You can read the full Fluoride Task Force report, which is full of credible, scientific evidence against the use of fluoride in water supplies, here:
Fluoride Task Force report
Based on the recommendations of the group, Fairbanks Mayor Jerry Cleworth introduced Ordinance 5849, which outlaws the addition of fluoride to the city's water supply system. After more than an hour of public testimony and deliberation at a recent hearing, which was mostly against the use of fluoride, the Fairbanks City Council voted 5-1 to end water fluoridation beginning on July 1, 2011.
"There is no way to control how much (fluoride) a person drinks," said Fairbanks resident Coert Olmsted at the meeting. He also cited credible information about how consuming fluoride internally, rather than having it applied topically, is highly toxic to the body.
This incredible health freedom victory in Fairbanks represents a model by which residents of other cities and towns that fluoridate their water can help end it as well. You can do your part by forwarding the Fairbanks Fluoride Task Force report to your own city councils, and urging them to read and consider it. You can also propose that they set up independent task forces of their own to investigate fluoride, which if done honestly will come to the same or similar conclusions about the dangers of fluoride.
With the removal of fluoride, the “pH” level of the water will increase somewhat, just slightly above the recommended levels suggested by the federal government. The normal range is 6.5 to 8.5, but the pH is expected to be about 8.55 without added fluoride, she said.
That means the water would be slightly more alkaline than recommended. The pH standard is not a requirement.
Tiffany Van Horn, director of administration for Golden Heart, said the company does not expect that consumers will notice any change in the water as the pH will be barely above the recommended range. The company is not required to make any changes to reduce the pH level, but it will wait and see before deciding if additional processing is needed.
From NaturalNews.com
You can read the full Fluoride Task Force report, which is full of credible, scientific evidence against the use of fluoride in water supplies, here:
Fluoride Task Force report
Based on the recommendations of the group, Fairbanks Mayor Jerry Cleworth introduced Ordinance 5849, which outlaws the addition of fluoride to the city's water supply system. After more than an hour of public testimony and deliberation at a recent hearing, which was mostly against the use of fluoride, the Fairbanks City Council voted 5-1 to end water fluoridation beginning on July 1, 2011.
"There is no way to control how much (fluoride) a person drinks," said Fairbanks resident Coert Olmsted at the meeting. He also cited credible information about how consuming fluoride internally, rather than having it applied topically, is highly toxic to the body.
This incredible health freedom victory in Fairbanks represents a model by which residents of other cities and towns that fluoridate their water can help end it as well. You can do your part by forwarding the Fairbanks Fluoride Task Force report to your own city councils, and urging them to read and consider it. You can also propose that they set up independent task forces of their own to investigate fluoride, which if done honestly will come to the same or similar conclusions about the dangers of fluoride.
18 Jun 2011
Statement: Water Fluoridation
Posted on: 16 June 2011, 3:46 pm in News
Statement: Water Fluoridation
South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) is pleased that following today’s judgement the legal process has now concluded.
Throughout this time the SHA Board has remained satisfied that water fluoridation at one part per million is a safe and effective way to tackle tooth decay in the Southampton area, and that the health benefits outweighed all other arguments against water fluoridation, including the level of support and opposition.
The process of adding fluoride to the water in Southampton and south west Hampshire will now continue as planned. It is likely to be several months before the necessary plant and machinery is constructed, operational and ready to commence the process of adding fluoride to the water supply.
ENDS
Notes:
1.Enquiries to: South Central SHA Communications team on 01635 275657
2.The NHS South Central Region covers the Isle of Wight, Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and.
3.www.southcentral.nhs.uk
Statement: Water Fluoridation
South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) is pleased that following today’s judgement the legal process has now concluded.
Throughout this time the SHA Board has remained satisfied that water fluoridation at one part per million is a safe and effective way to tackle tooth decay in the Southampton area, and that the health benefits outweighed all other arguments against water fluoridation, including the level of support and opposition.
The process of adding fluoride to the water in Southampton and south west Hampshire will now continue as planned. It is likely to be several months before the necessary plant and machinery is constructed, operational and ready to commence the process of adding fluoride to the water supply.
ENDS
Notes:
1.Enquiries to: South Central SHA Communications team on 01635 275657
2.The NHS South Central Region covers the Isle of Wight, Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and.
3.www.southcentral.nhs.uk
Daily Echo "In my view"
'Where is the evidence?'by Stephen Peckham
IT is to be expected that the British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (Daily Echo, June 4) supports water fluoridation but surprising that a professional association should claim benefits for water fluoridation that are not supported by good evidence.
While it is true that systematic reviews have shown some benefit, these same reviews highlight that the evidence is both old and of poor quality.
For their president to claim that "the number of children's teeth affected by decay will fall - probably by between about 30 per cent and 50 per cent - and there will also be long-term benefits for adults" is a statement of belief rather than fact.
Our local NHS has had to agree not to state that adults benefit as they could not provide sufficient evidence to the Advertising Standards Agency to back this claim.
Reference is also made in the article to the fact that more than 500 children need a general anaesthetic to have decayed teeth removed. Interestingly many fluoridated areas also have large numbers of children needing teeth removed due to dental decay such as the 600-plus children in fluoridated Wolverhampton.
What we do know, based on experience elsewhere, is that some 40 per cent of children in the city will get dental fluorosis with some of them requiring substantial future dental treatment as they get older.
In areas where fluoridated, some young children and adults consume excess fluoride.
This is the reason major cities in North America have stopped fluoridating their water supplies and, following the lead of Ireland and Canada, the US is now proposing to lower the maximum level of fluoride in water to 0.7ppm.
But apparently it is OK in England to expose us to higher levels of fluoride.
Having attended as a speaker at the British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry's conference in April, I was pleased to find that not all dental public health professionals share their association's views.
In fact one speaker described water fluoridation as "an obsolete and outdated policy that should be abandoned".
We need to listen to wiser words such as those of one of the more eminent members of the association who told me - and the Strategic Health Authority - back in 2008 that there is no evidence to support claims that it will reduce decay levels in the city.
Daily Echo - Hampshire Campaigners vow to keep pushing for decision U-turn
In today's Echo it reports (HAF) Hampshire Against Fluoridation is to force a debate by councillors in Southampton in the hope to that they will oppose the plans. The group has already collected 6000 signatures.
Unable to copy article at the request of the Echo.
Unable to copy article at the request of the Echo.
17 Jun 2011
Daily Echo - Fluoride in months
EXCLUSIVE By Jon Reeve
As last legal challenge fails in High Court, health bosses vow to quickly press ahead with controversial plans.....................
This report is removed at the request of the Echo Digital Editor.
Now available on line - click title.
As last legal challenge fails in High Court, health bosses vow to quickly press ahead with controversial plans.....................
This report is removed at the request of the Echo Digital Editor.
Now available on line - click title.
16 Jun 2011
British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD) and the BFS
No wonder Prof Peter Robinson (BASCD) came out in support of fluoridation I found both of these in University of Sheffield Senate Award Fellows (as at June 2008) pdf file. Along side his name was Prof Michael Lennon of the British Fluoridation Society.
Prof Peter Robinson Clinical Dentistry Peter.g.robinson@shef.ac.uk
Prof Michael Lennon Clinical Dentistry m.a.lennon@shef.ac.uk
Prof Peter Robinson Clinical Dentistry Peter.g.robinson@shef.ac.uk
Prof Michael Lennon Clinical Dentistry m.a.lennon@shef.ac.uk
pH levels and cancer Alkaline and Acidic Foods
...............The principal sources of acid buildup are:
1.) The metabolism and/or incomplete breakdown (oxidation) of foodstuffs or metabolic “waste” produced as a by-product of cellular activity. During normal cellular respiration and energy production , acids as produced as part or “waste” products. These acid must be “balanced”, neutralized, or removed by the body's buffering and detoxification systems through the kidneys, lungs, liver, and blood.
2.) The consumption of acid present in the food, air, and water supply. Nitrogen emissions from automobiles and industrial plants, food dyes, sprays, waxes, preservatives, additives, artificial sweeteners, fertilizers, water pollutants, and even chloride and fluoride in tap water are just some of the highly acidic chemicals are ingested by millions everyday. (Source: Michael Lam, MD, MPH – http://www.drlam.com/articles/acidosis.asp)............
Well worth reading
1.) The metabolism and/or incomplete breakdown (oxidation) of foodstuffs or metabolic “waste” produced as a by-product of cellular activity. During normal cellular respiration and energy production , acids as produced as part or “waste” products. These acid must be “balanced”, neutralized, or removed by the body's buffering and detoxification systems through the kidneys, lungs, liver, and blood.
2.) The consumption of acid present in the food, air, and water supply. Nitrogen emissions from automobiles and industrial plants, food dyes, sprays, waxes, preservatives, additives, artificial sweeteners, fertilizers, water pollutants, and even chloride and fluoride in tap water are just some of the highly acidic chemicals are ingested by millions everyday. (Source: Michael Lam, MD, MPH – http://www.drlam.com/articles/acidosis.asp)............
Well worth reading
Daily Echo - Send fluoride questions to health authority
Send fluoride questions to health authority
I AM writing to respond to G Payne (Letters, June 4).
The letter states: "Mrs Kinchington does well to draw attention to the irresponsible attitude of Southern Water in regard to fluoridation - a scheme with which they are willing to comply without protest."
G Payne also states that "Southern Water have made it clear that we do not know the effects of fluoride on the human body when bathing, nor the concentrations absorbed when cooking." G Payne encourages readers to write to us.
First, the decision to add fluoride to water in some areas of Southampton was made by the strategic health authority (SHA). Once this proposal was made, Southern Water's only role was to comment on the operational and engineering aspects.
Southern Water cannot take a medical or ethical view on the subject. We have directed all customers to the SHA to answer their questions if they have any concerns.
Second, under the Water Act 2003, if requested by a strategic health authority to add fluoride, then by law we must add fluoride to the water supplies for the areas requested.
When the SHA announced the proposal, it launched a consultation process and we encouraged all our customers to take part and make their views known.
Customers who have any questions about fluoride should direct them to the SHA for the reasons above.
MEYRICK GOUGH,
Water Quality and Strategy Manager Southern Water
AKA Pontius Pilate
I AM writing to respond to G Payne (Letters, June 4).
The letter states: "Mrs Kinchington does well to draw attention to the irresponsible attitude of Southern Water in regard to fluoridation - a scheme with which they are willing to comply without protest."
G Payne also states that "Southern Water have made it clear that we do not know the effects of fluoride on the human body when bathing, nor the concentrations absorbed when cooking." G Payne encourages readers to write to us.
First, the decision to add fluoride to water in some areas of Southampton was made by the strategic health authority (SHA). Once this proposal was made, Southern Water's only role was to comment on the operational and engineering aspects.
Southern Water cannot take a medical or ethical view on the subject. We have directed all customers to the SHA to answer their questions if they have any concerns.
Second, under the Water Act 2003, if requested by a strategic health authority to add fluoride, then by law we must add fluoride to the water supplies for the areas requested.
When the SHA announced the proposal, it launched a consultation process and we encouraged all our customers to take part and make their views known.
Customers who have any questions about fluoride should direct them to the SHA for the reasons above.
MEYRICK GOUGH,
Water Quality and Strategy Manager Southern Water
AKA Pontius Pilate
Daily Echo - HAMPSHIRE: Judge examines controversial scheme
HAMPSHIRE: Judge examines controversial scheme
Fluoride plans in High Court
CONTROVERSIAL plans to fluoridate Hampshire tap water were today due to be studied again by a High Court judge.
Southampton mum Gerri Milner has lodged an appeal against a decision earner this year to refuse permission for a judicial review to be heard examining whether health chiefs properly studied evidence for and against the scheme before approving it in 2009.
In February a judge at London's Royal Courts of Justice ruled there should not be a hearing, and also dismissed her legal challenge arguing that South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) should have listened to public opinion before voting unanimously in favour of the plans.
During a public consultation on the scheme, which will affect nearly 200,000 residents in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams, 72 per cent of respondents said they were against fluoridation.
Mr Justice Edward Holman expressed sympathy with Ms Milner and other anti-fluoride campaigners, but ruled against her lawyers' arguments that the law says the SHA should have been bound by public opinion.
He also rejected claims that not all board members were fully aware of evidence against the scheme, despite legal obligations to consider the "cogency" of all the arguments, assessing whether they are good points and based on sound scientific evidence.
But Ms Milner's barristers were today planning to argue that the judge was wrong, saying there is no proof all members had read all the evidence. Since the judgement the SHA has announced its plans to move ahead with the scheme.
Campaigners and council bosses have condemned that move as "arrogant", because the Government plans to scrap all SHAs by April next year.
Powers over fluoridation schemes would then pass to elected councillors.
Hampshire County Council has said it is opposed to the proposals, while Southampton City Council members voted to say they believe there should be a referendum to give residents the say over the plans.
Campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation is running a petition to try to force the authority to debate a motion calling on it to say it will oppose adding fluoride to tap water. To find out how to sign the petition visit dailyecho.co.uk.
Fluoride plans in High Court
CONTROVERSIAL plans to fluoridate Hampshire tap water were today due to be studied again by a High Court judge.
Southampton mum Gerri Milner has lodged an appeal against a decision earner this year to refuse permission for a judicial review to be heard examining whether health chiefs properly studied evidence for and against the scheme before approving it in 2009.
In February a judge at London's Royal Courts of Justice ruled there should not be a hearing, and also dismissed her legal challenge arguing that South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) should have listened to public opinion before voting unanimously in favour of the plans.
During a public consultation on the scheme, which will affect nearly 200,000 residents in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams, 72 per cent of respondents said they were against fluoridation.
Mr Justice Edward Holman expressed sympathy with Ms Milner and other anti-fluoride campaigners, but ruled against her lawyers' arguments that the law says the SHA should have been bound by public opinion.
He also rejected claims that not all board members were fully aware of evidence against the scheme, despite legal obligations to consider the "cogency" of all the arguments, assessing whether they are good points and based on sound scientific evidence.
But Ms Milner's barristers were today planning to argue that the judge was wrong, saying there is no proof all members had read all the evidence. Since the judgement the SHA has announced its plans to move ahead with the scheme.
Campaigners and council bosses have condemned that move as "arrogant", because the Government plans to scrap all SHAs by April next year.
Powers over fluoridation schemes would then pass to elected councillors.
Hampshire County Council has said it is opposed to the proposals, while Southampton City Council members voted to say they believe there should be a referendum to give residents the say over the plans.
Campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation is running a petition to try to force the authority to debate a motion calling on it to say it will oppose adding fluoride to tap water. To find out how to sign the petition visit dailyecho.co.uk.
13 Jun 2011
Daily Echo - What happened to freedom of choice?
SO the British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD) is backing the move to add fluoride to our water. I can remember years ago my dentist telling me not to swallow my fluoride toothpaste.What worries me is that this country is supposed to be democratic. Where is the democracy in the decision of a few privileged people to mass medicate a population against their will?
If the fluoride scheme goes ahead against the majority's wishes it will set a precedent for the future. Democracy, what democracy? It seems more like a dictatorship for a few people to take away my right to say no. Why doesn't this Government intervene and stop this process going ahead?
The source of funds to the NHS is from the taxpayer, which is being used for needless High Court actions instead of
being put into patients' care.
I have sympathy for the children who have extremely decayed teeth, but there are many ways to target these children with fluoride products and also educate their parents about the acidity in fruit juice/cordial drinks and the sugar content in sweets etc.
It seems that expenses are not the only problem for politicians but also our basic right to the freedom of choice.
SHIRLEY ASKEW, Totton.
12 Jun 2011
The Case Against Fluoridation (part 1 - 3)
Public meeting at Abu Bakr Mosque Southampton
Part 2
Part 3
11 Jun 2011
Daily Echo letter
SHA arrogance on fluorideTHE SHA has stated that the result of the public consultation on fluoridation was overruled because the public is too ignorant to hold a valid opinion.
This preposterous notion was openly revealed in a letter to the Echo (In My View. July 27, 2009) by its representative Olga Senior, who suggested that the public does not understand the complex health issues.
The most valuable lesson I have learned in life is that knowledge is very humbling; the more I learn, the more 1 realise how little I know.
Arrogance is a manifestation of ignorance. Perhaps if the SHA were to detach themselves from their inflated egos, they would address the disturbing gaps in their education to rectify their woeful knowledge on health matters.
It is, after all, plainly self evident that ingesting a hazardous waste chemical (hexafluorasilicic acid) over a lifetime can confer no health benefits whatsoever, but the bioaccumulative toxic load will almost certainly lay the foundation for debilitating degenerative disease.
Perhaps they would reflect too that the role of water in the body is to hydrate the cells, a process essential to life, and only pure unadulterated H20 can perform the function that Mother Nature intended to maintain optimum health.
Water is the lifeblood of the planet, our most precious resource that sustains all life on earth should be treated with the utmost respect and gratitude, not used as a toxic waste dump for corporate interests or a conduit to deliver mass medication to vulnerable populations.
The SHA should, then, be humbled to concede that the community they are about to poison rejected fluoridation with good reason.
CAROL SCARBOROUGH,
Shirley, Southampton.
10 Jun 2011
Water Fluoridation exposed during Casey Anthony Trial
This is testimony from Dr. Arpad Vass during the Casey Anthony trial.
Dr. Vass is one of the few people researching the vapors released from decaying or decomposing human bodies. His groundbreaking research has inadvertently exposed the lies we are told about Fluoridated water.
Watch this and ask yourself do you want it to build up in your body?
Daily Echo Letters
Scrap the fluoride plansI DEFINITELY do not agree with the thought of fluoride in our water.
What about all the babies that have cooled boiled water? I don't think you can boil fluoride out of water, so that means it's getting into their little systems too. Besides, most would be wasted on washing-up, washing machines, dishwashers, washing cars etc, the list is endless. The kids who have bad teeth are not going to drink water anyway, they will be on the fizzy pop.
I think the whole idea ought to be scrapped.
JO, Hampshire.
Lymington Times
Experts back fluoride to halve child tooth decayDENTAL experts have praised health bosses for moving ahead with controversial plans to fluoridate tap water.
The NHS scheme, approved last year by South Central Strategic Health Authority to reduce child tooth decay, will affect 190,000 people in the Southampton area, including 8,000 in Totton.
Members of the British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD) have unanimously passed a motion backing the move at a conference in Sheffield.
The organisation claimed the scheme would reduce child tooth decay by up to half and insisted it was a safe method.
But objectors, including New Forest and Hampshire councils, said it was "forced medication" and a
15,000-name petition objecting was submitted last year.
Now, the Hampshire Against Fluoride campaign is gathering names for a fresh petition to persuade Southampton City Council to formally reverse its vote in 2008 to support the scheme, although it later backed a referendum.
The project was put on hold until a High Court judge earlier this year rejected a judicial review bought by Southampton mum Gerri Milner, who argued the SHA did not listen to public opinion before approving it.
But now the scheme is back on track and the newly elected BASCD president, Professor Peter Robinson, said fluoridation marked an "important step" in tackling the oral health problems of children.
"In this day and age, it is wholly unacceptable that around 500
children a year from Southampton should have to undergo a general anaesthetic in hospital to have severely decayed teeth extracted," he said.
"We can confidently anticipate that several years after fluoridation has started in the city, this figure will have been significantly reduced.
"Four systematic reviews of the worldwide evidence on the benefits of water fluoridation published in the past 10 years suggest that, in the area to be fluoridated in and around Southampton, the number of children's teeth affected by decay will fall — probably by between about 30% and 50%."
In a public consultation last year, 72% of respondents objected to fluoridation, although a Mori poll for the SHA showed only 38% against.
With all the new dentist practices advertising for patients that seem to have sprung up lately in the city I'm sure there will be a notable improvement.
8 Jun 2011
A third of under-fives in (Fluoridated) Birmingham already have rotting teeth
A third of under-fives in Birmingham already have rotting teeth, shock figures showby Alison Dayani, Birmingham Mail
Jun 7 2011
NHS workers have now launched special action into the damning state of tooth decay in the city.
Latest rates of dental decay sent a warning shot to dentists and health bosses as it showed a third of five-year-olds in Birmingham have decayed or missing or fillings.
It comes as numbers of people seeing an NHS dentist have plummeted and obesity in the city’s children is among the worst in the UK as they over-indulge in sugar-packed fatty foods. Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Trust’s under-fives team has been using giant tooth brushes and teeth as props to drill into children the dental hygiene habits that can last a lifetime.
Jasmin Frater, postnatal co-ordinator for the Trust’s under fives programme, said: “Parents need to help children get into healthy habits early on in their life.
“Having a healthy mouth, tongue, teeth and gums is very important for a child’s development.
“The best way to combat dental problems is to prevent them from occurring in the first place.”
In March, it emerged that nearly 50,000 fewer city residents were seeing an NHS dentist compared to five years ago with innercity suburbs hit the hardest.
Birmingham Local Dental Committee blamed a “failure” of the dental contract changes in 2006.
Nearly one in every seven schoolchildren aged four to five in inner-city areas is now clinically obese, and one in every ten in north, east and south Birmingham.
Parents are being urged to reduce the amount and frequency of sugar consumed by their children and to ensure they brush their teeth twice a day, once last thing at night and in the morning before breakfast, using a pea size amount of fluoride toothpaste.
Parents are also advised to supervise children under seven when brushing their teeth and to make sure they see a dentist regularly for check-ups.
In Birmingham, Solihull and the Black Country (97%) are fluoridated.
Daily Echo letter
French have a choiceA FEW observations on water fluoridation, which is currently an issue in the Southampton area of the UK
The fluoride added to tap water is industrial waste which is expensive to dispose of safely.
The French do not add fluoride to tap water for "ethical reasons and medical considerations" but fluoride is added to some brands of table salt, giving us a choice whether we are medicated or not, unlike when it is added to tap water.
The salt packets with fluoride give a health warning not to consume at above half the one part per million level the UK & USA governments say is safe.
The USA has said recently it might reduce this safe level.
A warning is on toothpaste containing fluoride in the USA to use only small amounts.
Worldwide only a few, mostly English-speaking countries, add fluoride to tap water and those with least tooth decay have rejected the practice or given it up after it did not reduce tooth decay.
EDWARD PRIESTLEY, Gajoubert, France.
7 Jun 2011
House of Lords
Asked by Earl Baldwin of Bewdley
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Warner on 24 March 2006 (WA 88) and Lord Darzi of Denham on 1 October 2007 (WA 146), (a) what high quality research into the association of water fluoridation with infant mortality, congenital defects, bone problems and IQ they have carried out as recommended in section 12.4 of the 2000 report of the York systematic review; and (b) which part of the Written Answer of 24 March 2006 is a quotation from the Department of Health report on Health and Human Subjects 41 in 1994, and which part forms a commitment to research, and whether they will reissue the Written Answer accordingly.[HL9239]
Earl Howe: Following publication of the York report, the department funded the Medical Research Council to identify areas of uncertainty regarding the balance of benefits and risks of water fluoridation, and to make appropriate recommendations for research to address these uncertainties. The department has since funded the School of Dental Sciences at Newcastle University to compare the bioavailability of fluoride in naturally fluoridated water with artificially fluoridated water. Currently, the School of Dentistry at Manchester University is investigating the prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis with funds from the NHS National Institute for Health Research. We are also considering an evaluation of a new fluoridation scheme to address further recommendations in the York report to strengthen the evidence base on fluoridation. The quotation from the report on Health and Human Subjects 41 ends at "....a further wide safety margin above the more usual fluoride intakes in fluoridated areas".
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Warner on 24 March 2006 (WA 88) and Lord Darzi of Denham on 1 October 2007 (WA 146), (a) what high quality research into the association of water fluoridation with infant mortality, congenital defects, bone problems and IQ they have carried out as recommended in section 12.4 of the 2000 report of the York systematic review; and (b) which part of the Written Answer of 24 March 2006 is a quotation from the Department of Health report on Health and Human Subjects 41 in 1994, and which part forms a commitment to research, and whether they will reissue the Written Answer accordingly.[HL9239]
Earl Howe: Following publication of the York report, the department funded the Medical Research Council to identify areas of uncertainty regarding the balance of benefits and risks of water fluoridation, and to make appropriate recommendations for research to address these uncertainties. The department has since funded the School of Dental Sciences at Newcastle University to compare the bioavailability of fluoride in naturally fluoridated water with artificially fluoridated water. Currently, the School of Dentistry at Manchester University is investigating the prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis with funds from the NHS National Institute for Health Research. We are also considering an evaluation of a new fluoridation scheme to address further recommendations in the York report to strengthen the evidence base on fluoridation. The quotation from the report on Health and Human Subjects 41 ends at "....a further wide safety margin above the more usual fluoride intakes in fluoridated areas".
4 Jun 2011
Only 5 days left - can you help?
We still need more signatures - can you help?
A copy of the Petition Form with the address to return the form to is attached as well a Poster . Only citizens within Southampton are eligible to sign - do you know friends or family members in Southampton who may like to know about this chance to put a spoke in the SCSHA's plan to enforce fluoridation.
Time is running out to sign the petition against Water Fluoridation…
Industrial-grade fluoride is due to be added to the drinking water of the Southampton area. The consultation showed that 72% of local people were against compulsory water fluoridation. Despite this, the Strategic Health Authority (based outside the area in Berkshire) is determined to push the scheme through before they are abolished in 2012.
Is this fair? Is this ethical? Is this democratic? Is Southampton willing to be both the first and last area to be used to further the pro-fluoridation lobby?
A copy of the Petition Form with the address to return the form to is attached as well a Poster . Only citizens within Southampton are eligible to sign - do you know friends or family members in Southampton who may like to know about this chance to put a spoke in the SCSHA's plan to enforce fluoridation.
Time is running out to sign the petition against Water Fluoridation…
Industrial-grade fluoride is due to be added to the drinking water of the Southampton area. The consultation showed that 72% of local people were against compulsory water fluoridation. Despite this, the Strategic Health Authority (based outside the area in Berkshire) is determined to push the scheme through before they are abolished in 2012.
Is this fair? Is this ethical? Is this democratic? Is Southampton willing to be both the first and last area to be used to further the pro-fluoridation lobby?
Daily Echo letter - Tell supplier you object
Tell supplier you objectMRS Kinchington (Letters, May 28) does well to draw attention to the irresponsible attitude of Southern Water in regard to fluoridation - a scheme with which they are willing to comply without protest.
In the course of correspondence putting specific questions to them, Southern Water have made it clear that in fact they do not know the effects of fluoride on the human body when bathing, nor the concentrations absorbed by food when cooking.
They confess that the general public has no way of measuring the quantity in the water and they flatly refuse to consider compensating their customers who will have no option but to pay for a supply of reduced quality.
I suggest that all customers who object to fluoridation write directly to Southern Water and tell them so. It may be that someone in their office will understand why people are concerned.
G PAYNE, Southampton.
Daily Echo
Members say controversial scheme will 'significantly cut' levels of decay in childrenDental group backs health chiefs' fluoridation plans
By Jon Reeve
Jon.reeve@dailyecho.co.uk
HEALTH bosses have been praised for their decision to plough ahead with controversial plans to fluoridate Hampshire tap water.
Members of the British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD) enthusiastically backed South Central Strategic Health Authority's move to work towards adding fluoride to the water supplies delivered to nearly 200,000 people.
The organisation says it believes the scheme will reduce child tooth decay by up to half, as well as "significantly" reducing the number of kids undergoing general anaesthetic to have surgery to remove extremely damaged teeth.
Members unanimously passed a motion at a conference in Sheffield offering their support for the SHA, which has begun work to move towards implementing fluoridation for Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams.
The project had been on hold until a High Court judge earlier this year rejected a judicial review bought by Southampton mum Gerri Milner, who argued the SHA should have listened to public opinion before approving it.
During a public consultation, 72 per cent of the 10,000 respondents said they opposed fluoridation.
Ms Milner is now appealing the judge's decision to refuse permission for a review hearing studying whether the SHA properly took account of all the evidence sent to it during the consultation.
But a motion passed by the BASCD, which has long supported fluoridation, insists it is a "safe, effective and ost-effective approach" to reducing health inequalities.
Newly-elected BASCD president, Professor Peter Robinson, described the SHA's move to work towards instructing Southern Water to add fluoride to supplies as "a very important step in tackling the oral health problems of current and future generations of children."
He said: "In this day and age, it is wholly unacceptable that around 500 children a year from Southampton should have to undergo a general anaesthetic in hospital to have severely decayed teeth extracted.
"We can confidently anticipate that, several years after fluoridation has started in the city, this figure will have been significantly reduced.
"Four systematic reviews of the worldwide evidence on the benefits of water fluoridation published in the past ten years suggest that, hi the area to be fluoridated in and around Southampton, the number of children's teeth affected by decay will fall - probably by between about 30 per cent and 50 per cent - and there will also be long-term benefits for adults."
ANTI-FLUORIDE campaigners are holding a public meeting in Southampton tomorrow to discuss the dangers of adding the chemical to water. Members of the public are invited to Abu Bakr Mosque, Community Centre Hall, Argyle Rd, from 2pm to hear why it is believed the Hampshire scheme should not be allowed to go ahead. Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) chairman Stephen Peckham will be joined in giving presentations by Arshad Sharif and dentist Zac Cox.
They will discuss research showing fluoride can cause bone cancer in young boys, as well as other illnesses including thyroid problems and Brittle Bone Disease. HAF has been a major opponent of South Central Strategic Hearth Authority's plans to fluoridate tap water in and around Southampton. It is currently organising a petition calling on Southampton City Council to pass a motion expressing its opposition to the scheme.
The authority, which is set to take over powers over fluoridation when the government scraps SHAs next year, has previously said it wants to see a referendum on the subject.
2 Jun 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
