.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Saturday, March 31, 2007

USA - Right to Choose letter

Right to Choose
The author of the editorial "Giving Fluoridation Teeth" (BDN, March 19) asserts: "The public doesn't make decisions about what drugs best manage diabetes or what treatments are most effective for lowering cholesterol. Yet, Maine law allows local voters to decide whether fluoride should be added to their water."
However, individuals do have the right to decide which medications to take, and the right to choose not to take any at all. Why shouldn't we have the same choice simply because the "medication" is added to our drinking water?
Using this faulty logic, one could assert that any number of other substances thought to benefit public health should be added to the municipal water supply. Why not vitamins and minerals, for instance? The answer, of course, is because not everyone needs or wants vitamin and mineral supplements. In some cases, they may even be harmful or contraindicated.
Fluoride, unlike other compounds found in our water, is added to prevent tooth decay - not to make it safer to drink. I believe that the larger issue here is not whether fluoride is helpful or harmful, but an individual's right to choose what substances they ingest.

Darylyne Provost

Hampden

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home