They failed because no contract was signed by SHA with Southern Water and under the new legislation responsibility is now in the hands of the councils not the PHE. The other factor is the consultation held by the SHA never covered all of the area that owing to the pipework system would have fluoride in the water.
What a waste of money that could have vastly improved the health of the deprived children with parents that need educating.
2 comments:
For once i didn't need to see who had written this as it was clear it was no normal residents letter...I would expect Mr Selbie to be following the debate he is Chief Executive after all,the facts are you went totally quiet on us there where no forth coming answers no press releases no one knew what was going on,if that's not being ignorant then i don't no what is...if it was as you say the council who were the ones taking there time then why have they and others been frantically trying to contact you with little success..."A small group of campaigners", is he serious, 72% is not small,the pro fluoride group,now that's small so small we didn't even see them let alone hear them...You had your chance to "asses" it's not our fault that you even cocked that up,i and many many others did not receive a single item regarding the introduction of fluoride to the water and many areas were not even consulted full stop...Everyone has a voice, saying the children didn't have one is playing on words as most children wouldn't have understood the concept in the first place,plus you only targeted adults in your assessment if you wanted the children to have a say you would of included them...This is no time to be winging about this and that it's time to show some leadership and to do what you set out to do ,and that's to help the minority group who seem unable to look after there own teeth...
This is just a pathetic attempt to save face because David has beaten Goliath. So PHE has been clear throughout that if there was insufficient local support they would choose not to proceed. Oh really? Then why have they been vowing to implement
the scheme for the past six years in the face of overwhelming opposition? Only SCC ever supported it and even they changed their position long ago. He tries to pretend that the campaigners who turned this around are insignificant when we in fact represent the feelings of the majority of local people who
have a view on the issue. There is no need to assess the views of the rest because in medical ethics, if only one person objects, a proposed health intervention cannot be enforced. He implies that the children are still suffering because they couldn't implement the fluoridation scheme, which proves PHE has done nothing to introduce a community wide targeted programme instead, such as Childsmile, which has been very
successful and hugely popular in Scotland as a stand alone intervention without medicating the entire population. Putting toxic fluoride in the water will do nothing to remedy the consequences of neglecting oral hygiene and it is absurd to claim that it is the most effective way to reduce tooth decay. Targeting irresponsible parents and teaching children good habits should have been the obvious course of action from the very beginning.
So much for his concerns for kids' teeth.
Post a Comment