DEAR Editor,
I read your unscientific article on fluoride with interest. It failed to answer the basic questions on fluoridation that were raised in Northern Ireland when our councils heard this issue. Northern Ireland had a three month consultation period in 1996, with the result that 25 out of 26 Councils and the four Area Health & Social Services Councils all voted against water fluoridation after hearing both sides of the argument. Our Councils voted against for the following reasons: A) It is a breech of your freedom to choose what drug you do or do not take. B) 98% of Europe had banned or rejected fluoridation. C) No government representative could explain how it affected teeth only, when it had access to every cell of your body. D) 99.9% would be lost in underground leaks, waste water and flushing toilets, thereby wasting millions of pounds. E) The dose could not be controlled as it would be in all food and drink manufactured using the water, also it is in dental products, pesticides, herbicides, unleaded petrol fumes, coal burning fumes, other drugs like Prozac, Rohipnol, CFCs, etc. I was elected as the PR & Information Officer for the Councils of Northern Ireland who voted against. To this day Northern Ireland remains fluoride free like the 98% of Europe. The author never tackles the reason why Europe have banned in law or rejected mass-medication of their populations. It should be pointed out that 97% of the world population do NOT drink artificially fluoridated water. Israels High Court has just banned water fluoridation and it has been recently stopped in Calgary & Windsor in Canada, Queensland Australia has ended mandatory fluoridation and Austin Texas, as well as Portland Oregon voted it out. There are a large and growing number of published peer reviewed studies linking fluoride consumption to various illnesses. These studies can be viewed on line at: www.fluoridealert.org. I was present at a meeting on Oct. 26, 1998 with Tessa Jowel the British Health Minister in London. Also present was Dr. A.K.Susheela, a professor of chemistry, from India. Who had 100 published peer reviewed studies in her own name proving harm to humans from fluoride at similar levels as those used in the Republics’ water supply. (Her studies are also freely available on line.) After her presentation Britain has remained only 10% fluoridated, with Scotlands Assembly voting against fluoridation.
Yours sincerely,
Walter Graham
PR & Information Officer
Northern Ireland Councils Against Fluoridation
The 1998 meeting arranged by the NPWA had no lasting affect on the Government who still tried their utmost to introduce fluoridation and would have succeeded if local groups hadn't worked to stop it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Walter is quite right about the meeting with Tessa Jowell. As Chairman of NPWA I arranged the meeting, the presentation took about an hour and a half with councillors also present. Professor Susheela's presentation was illustrated with the effects of fluoride on the microvilli in the gut. This gave symtoms similar to irritable bowel syndrome. Jane Jones presented a petition to stop fluoridation with 32,000 signatures collected by NPWA members throughout the country. Prof Susheela also gave the presentation to the shadow health minister and the All Party Group Against Fluoridation. We then spent several days holding meetings in Birmingham and Yorkshire. The result of our efforts-nil! The NPWA and UKCAF came to the conclusion that collecting petition signatures and presenting to government was a waste of tme and effort. Also bringing the top scientis in fluoride research in the world to Health Ministers also a waste of time and money. Prof Susheela was also a senior advisor to the Indian Government. Health ministers and shadow ministers ignore science and follow their party's political agenda.
Cll Liz Vaughan UK Councils Against Fluoridationse
Post a Comment