UK Health bosses make new fluoridation bid - latest letters
Posted by: bystander, lancs on 11:53am Sat 17 Nov 07
Why should we all be poisoned because the chavvy scroungers won't brush their dirty rotting teeth? Have you seen them on Kyle?
Posted by: EUES Ireland, Dublin on 12:28pm Sat 17 Nov 07
If one studies the statistics issued by the CDC in the U.S., one will discover that the highly fluoridated states have no lower cavity rates than the low fluoridated states. You will discover, however, that the cancer rates are much higher in highly fluoridated states, especially affecting ethnic racial groups. The very highly fluoridated large cities in America have extremely high caries rates. This suggests that lack of dental practitioners (who generally do not accept Medicare), poor dental education, bad diet and high sugar intake are the primary causes of dental decay in deprived areas. Dumping hydrofluorosilicic acid, a proven industrial waste and the usual fluoridation agent in these schemes, into your drinking water will not serve to tackle the root causes of dental caries, but will certainly increase the long term incidence of thyroid problems, osteoporosis, brittle bones, fluorosis and will have other health consequences, some still being researched, such as the link with Alzheimer's Disease and the high levels of aluminium found in the brains of sufferers, a possible cause of which is the binding and retention of Al and lead with fluoride in soft tissue. No, fluoridation is not the way, as the European countries with the least cavity rates DO NOT fluoridate. This practice only helps provide multi-billion dollar savings to the phosphate, steel, and aluminium industries which sell the waste to the local authorities rather than having to process it as the [bold]hazardous waste[/bold] that it is, an expensive responsibility they would rather
Posted by: BRIAN JACKSON, East Lancashire on 5:26pm Sat 17 Nov 07
We need fluoride like a hole in the head. Oral hygienE, a balanced diet and good dentistry is what is really needed but dentistry in particular has become a Cinderella operation in recent years, especially here in East Lancs. Fluoride is toxic and corrosive and should not be added to our diet. We already get more than enough of this muck from soft drinks, processed food, tea and other medications. Unfortunately no one knows what levels we are already getting and the governments own advisors and the WHO have both said the practice should not be expanded untill more research is done. But of course the Nanny State always knows best (NOT) Fluorides are on the EEC Grey List of chemicals which are toxic and bioaccumulative and they should not be released into the wider environment. Many of the medics who think this is a good idea know little or nothing of either epidemeology or toxicology and should not be advertising and promoting medicinal claims for something which is neither a food nor a licensed medicine. To do so is an illegal act according to legal advice we have received. Join Friends of the Earth, the National Pure Water Association and the Soil Association and SAY NO TO FLUORIDE. Brian Jackson, Co-ordinator, Friends of the Earth Fluoridation Campaign.
Posted by: Emily McKee, New Mexico, USA on 6:53pm Sat 17 Nov 07
As Mr. Jackson stated previously, what is needed is better oral care, a healthy diet with less sugar/ candy/sweets/sodas & regular visits to a dentist/dental hygenist who can help to educate children about the importance of caring for their teeth.
Ultimately, it's OUR responsibility to keep ourselves & our families healthy, not 'The State'.
Fluoride HAS proven to be TOXIC & has NOT been proven to be an effective decay preventing dentifrice!
It is already being added to too many of the foods & beverages we ingest on a daily basis, many times unknowingly!
If you do not do so already, begin reading the small print on the labels...you might be suprised at just how much fluoride we are already exposing ourselves & our families to.
Here in the US we have been informed to make sure that water used to make formula for infants has NOT been fluoridated, as it has been proven to be accumulative & detrimental to the longterm health of babies & young children.
Please take the time to become informed to the health hazards of this toxin & how it effects you, your children & our future generations. Please keep saying NO TO FLUORIDE.
Posted by: Dianne Standen, Cumbria on 7:15pm Sat 17 Nov 07
In your coverage of this issue government public health consultant Melanie Catleugh, said: "Fluoridation of public water supplies is widely used in the UK and many countries across the world, and has been shown to be highly effective in preventing tooth decay. Adjustment of the level if fluoride in the water to improve dental health has a 60-year history." I live in a fluoridated area[West Cumbria] . I have two children with severe dental fluorosis [excess fluoride], they will need a lifetime of expensive remedial dental work to deal with it. We do not know the long term consequences upon their health. What Melanie Catleugh has omitted to mention is that in 60 years of fluoridation there has been no effective long term research into the impact of fluoride. It is misleading and deceptive to describe it as 'adjusting the level of fluoride'. We are treated with hexafluorsilic acid. It is contaminated with arsenic, cadnium, lead, mercury etc as it is obtained as a 'by product' of the fertiliser industry. It is NOT the fluoride which occurs naturally in some areas. Even if one had no qualms about the ethics of mass medicating a population Lancs people would be right to be concerned about this Labour Government's support of an unresearched chemical in a public water supply. It may help if they read the third public protest by scientists the Labour government employed to undertake an independent scientific review of this clumsy approach to tackling childhood dental decay. Last month in the British Medical Journal those scientists, and others, accused the government of "one-sided handling of the evidence" and add that "the Department of Health's objectivity is questionable", In their review they found that studies to show the benefits of water fluoridation on teeth were few and inconsistent. They found the rate of dental caries caused by tooth decay dropped substantially both in countries which have added fluoride, such as Germany and Portugal, and those which have not, such as Austria and Sweden. They said there is strong evidence that using toothpaste containing fluoride does reduce tooth decay. However studies on the side-effects of fluoride in water were low-quality making it hard to estimate how many people would suffer mottled teeth, and impossible at present to reach conclusions on other areas of potential damage such as bladder cancer and bone fracture[bold]bold[/bold]
In your coverage of this issue government public health consultant Melanie Catleugh, said: "Fluoridation of public water supplies is widely used in the UK and many countries across the world, and has been shown to be highly effective in preventing tooth decay.
Adjustment of the level if fluoride in the water to improve dental health has a 60-year history."
I live in a fluoridated area . I have two children with severe dental fluorosis , they will need a lifetime of expensive remedial dental work to deal with it. We do not know the long term consequences upon their health. What Melanie Catleugh has omitted to mention is that in 60 years of fluoridation there has been no effective long term research into the impact of fluoride.
It is misleading and deceptive to describe it as 'adjusting the level of fluoride'. We are treated with hexafluorsilic acid. It is contaminated with arsenic, cadnium, lead, mercury etc as it is obtained as a 'by product' of the fertiliser industry. It is NOT the fluoride which occurs naturally in some areas.
Even if one had no qualms about the ethics of mass medicating a population Lancs people would be right to be concerned about this Labour Government's support of an unresearched chemical in a public water supply.
It may help if they read the third public protest by scientists the Labour government employed to undertake an independent scientific review of this clumsy approach to tackling childhood dental decay.
Last month in the British Medical Journal those scientists, and others, accused the government of "one-sided handling of the evidence" and add that "the Department of Health's objectivity is questionable",
In their review they found that studies to show the benefits of water fluoridation on teeth were few and inconsistent. They found the rate of dental caries caused by tooth decay dropped substantially both in countries which have added fluoride, such as Germany and Portugal, and those which have not, such as Austria and Sweden. They said there is strong evidence that using toothpaste containing fluoride does reduce tooth decay. However studies on the side-effects of fluoride in water were low-quality making it hard to estimate how many people would suffer mottled teeth, and impossible at present to reach conclusions on other areas of potential damage such as bladder cancer and bone fracture
Posted by: Doug Cross, Cumbria on 9:25pm Sat 17 Nov 07
The use of fluorosilicate as an additive in drinking water is illegal - no fluorides or similar substances are permitted food additives. These chemicals are or contain scheduled poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, with no permission for medicinal use; putting them into water contravenes the Poisons Act 1972, and is an assault. Claiming that any product without a medical marketing authorization (for example, fluoridated water) has medicinal properties is prohibited under the Medicines Act 1968. Stating that fluoridated water prevents dental caries is a prohibited medicinal claim, and should be drawn to the attention of Trading Standards officials.
The use of fluorosilicate as an additive in drinking water is illegal - no fluorides or similar substances are permitted food additives. These chemicals are or contain scheduled poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, with no permission for medicinal use; putting them into water contravenes the Poisons Act 1972, and is an assault. Claiming that any product without a medical marketing authorization (for example, fluoridated water) has medicinal properties is prohibited under the Medicines Act 1968. Stating that fluoridated water prevents dental caries is a prohibited medicinal claim, and should be drawn to the attention of Trading Standards officials.
Why should we all be poisoned because the chavvy scroungers won't brush their dirty rotting teeth? Have you seen them on Kyle?
Posted by: EUES Ireland, Dublin on 12:28pm Sat 17 Nov 07
If one studies the statistics issued by the CDC in the U.S., one will discover that the highly fluoridated states have no lower cavity rates than the low fluoridated states. You will discover, however, that the cancer rates are much higher in highly fluoridated states, especially affecting ethnic racial groups. The very highly fluoridated large cities in America have extremely high caries rates. This suggests that lack of dental practitioners (who generally do not accept Medicare), poor dental education, bad diet and high sugar intake are the primary causes of dental decay in deprived areas. Dumping hydrofluorosilicic acid, a proven industrial waste and the usual fluoridation agent in these schemes, into your drinking water will not serve to tackle the root causes of dental caries, but will certainly increase the long term incidence of thyroid problems, osteoporosis, brittle bones, fluorosis and will have other health consequences, some still being researched, such as the link with Alzheimer's Disease and the high levels of aluminium found in the brains of sufferers, a possible cause of which is the binding and retention of Al and lead with fluoride in soft tissue. No, fluoridation is not the way, as the European countries with the least cavity rates DO NOT fluoridate. This practice only helps provide multi-billion dollar savings to the phosphate, steel, and aluminium industries which sell the waste to the local authorities rather than having to process it as the [bold]hazardous waste[/bold] that it is, an expensive responsibility they would rather
Posted by: BRIAN JACKSON, East Lancashire on 5:26pm Sat 17 Nov 07
We need fluoride like a hole in the head. Oral hygienE, a balanced diet and good dentistry is what is really needed but dentistry in particular has become a Cinderella operation in recent years, especially here in East Lancs. Fluoride is toxic and corrosive and should not be added to our diet. We already get more than enough of this muck from soft drinks, processed food, tea and other medications. Unfortunately no one knows what levels we are already getting and the governments own advisors and the WHO have both said the practice should not be expanded untill more research is done. But of course the Nanny State always knows best (NOT) Fluorides are on the EEC Grey List of chemicals which are toxic and bioaccumulative and they should not be released into the wider environment. Many of the medics who think this is a good idea know little or nothing of either epidemeology or toxicology and should not be advertising and promoting medicinal claims for something which is neither a food nor a licensed medicine. To do so is an illegal act according to legal advice we have received. Join Friends of the Earth, the National Pure Water Association and the Soil Association and SAY NO TO FLUORIDE. Brian Jackson, Co-ordinator, Friends of the Earth Fluoridation Campaign.
Posted by: Emily McKee, New Mexico, USA on 6:53pm Sat 17 Nov 07
As Mr. Jackson stated previously, what is needed is better oral care, a healthy diet with less sugar/ candy/sweets/sodas & regular visits to a dentist/dental hygenist who can help to educate children about the importance of caring for their teeth.
Ultimately, it's OUR responsibility to keep ourselves & our families healthy, not 'The State'.
Fluoride HAS proven to be TOXIC & has NOT been proven to be an effective decay preventing dentifrice!
It is already being added to too many of the foods & beverages we ingest on a daily basis, many times unknowingly!
If you do not do so already, begin reading the small print on the labels...you might be suprised at just how much fluoride we are already exposing ourselves & our families to.
Here in the US we have been informed to make sure that water used to make formula for infants has NOT been fluoridated, as it has been proven to be accumulative & detrimental to the longterm health of babies & young children.
Please take the time to become informed to the health hazards of this toxin & how it effects you, your children & our future generations. Please keep saying NO TO FLUORIDE.
Posted by: Dianne Standen, Cumbria on 7:15pm Sat 17 Nov 07
In your coverage of this issue government public health consultant Melanie Catleugh, said: "Fluoridation of public water supplies is widely used in the UK and many countries across the world, and has been shown to be highly effective in preventing tooth decay. Adjustment of the level if fluoride in the water to improve dental health has a 60-year history." I live in a fluoridated area[West Cumbria] . I have two children with severe dental fluorosis [excess fluoride], they will need a lifetime of expensive remedial dental work to deal with it. We do not know the long term consequences upon their health. What Melanie Catleugh has omitted to mention is that in 60 years of fluoridation there has been no effective long term research into the impact of fluoride. It is misleading and deceptive to describe it as 'adjusting the level of fluoride'. We are treated with hexafluorsilic acid. It is contaminated with arsenic, cadnium, lead, mercury etc as it is obtained as a 'by product' of the fertiliser industry. It is NOT the fluoride which occurs naturally in some areas. Even if one had no qualms about the ethics of mass medicating a population Lancs people would be right to be concerned about this Labour Government's support of an unresearched chemical in a public water supply. It may help if they read the third public protest by scientists the Labour government employed to undertake an independent scientific review of this clumsy approach to tackling childhood dental decay. Last month in the British Medical Journal those scientists, and others, accused the government of "one-sided handling of the evidence" and add that "the Department of Health's objectivity is questionable", In their review they found that studies to show the benefits of water fluoridation on teeth were few and inconsistent. They found the rate of dental caries caused by tooth decay dropped substantially both in countries which have added fluoride, such as Germany and Portugal, and those which have not, such as Austria and Sweden. They said there is strong evidence that using toothpaste containing fluoride does reduce tooth decay. However studies on the side-effects of fluoride in water were low-quality making it hard to estimate how many people would suffer mottled teeth, and impossible at present to reach conclusions on other areas of potential damage such as bladder cancer and bone fracture[bold]bold[/bold]
In your coverage of this issue government public health consultant Melanie Catleugh, said: "Fluoridation of public water supplies is widely used in the UK and many countries across the world, and has been shown to be highly effective in preventing tooth decay.
Adjustment of the level if fluoride in the water to improve dental health has a 60-year history."
I live in a fluoridated area . I have two children with severe dental fluorosis , they will need a lifetime of expensive remedial dental work to deal with it. We do not know the long term consequences upon their health. What Melanie Catleugh has omitted to mention is that in 60 years of fluoridation there has been no effective long term research into the impact of fluoride.
It is misleading and deceptive to describe it as 'adjusting the level of fluoride'. We are treated with hexafluorsilic acid. It is contaminated with arsenic, cadnium, lead, mercury etc as it is obtained as a 'by product' of the fertiliser industry. It is NOT the fluoride which occurs naturally in some areas.
Even if one had no qualms about the ethics of mass medicating a population Lancs people would be right to be concerned about this Labour Government's support of an unresearched chemical in a public water supply.
It may help if they read the third public protest by scientists the Labour government employed to undertake an independent scientific review of this clumsy approach to tackling childhood dental decay.
Last month in the British Medical Journal those scientists, and others, accused the government of "one-sided handling of the evidence" and add that "the Department of Health's objectivity is questionable",
In their review they found that studies to show the benefits of water fluoridation on teeth were few and inconsistent. They found the rate of dental caries caused by tooth decay dropped substantially both in countries which have added fluoride, such as Germany and Portugal, and those which have not, such as Austria and Sweden. They said there is strong evidence that using toothpaste containing fluoride does reduce tooth decay. However studies on the side-effects of fluoride in water were low-quality making it hard to estimate how many people would suffer mottled teeth, and impossible at present to reach conclusions on other areas of potential damage such as bladder cancer and bone fracture
Posted by: Doug Cross, Cumbria on 9:25pm Sat 17 Nov 07
The use of fluorosilicate as an additive in drinking water is illegal - no fluorides or similar substances are permitted food additives. These chemicals are or contain scheduled poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, with no permission for medicinal use; putting them into water contravenes the Poisons Act 1972, and is an assault. Claiming that any product without a medical marketing authorization (for example, fluoridated water) has medicinal properties is prohibited under the Medicines Act 1968. Stating that fluoridated water prevents dental caries is a prohibited medicinal claim, and should be drawn to the attention of Trading Standards officials.
The use of fluorosilicate as an additive in drinking water is illegal - no fluorides or similar substances are permitted food additives. These chemicals are or contain scheduled poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, with no permission for medicinal use; putting them into water contravenes the Poisons Act 1972, and is an assault. Claiming that any product without a medical marketing authorization (for example, fluoridated water) has medicinal properties is prohibited under the Medicines Act 1968. Stating that fluoridated water prevents dental caries is a prohibited medicinal claim, and should be drawn to the attention of Trading Standards officials.
posted by Bill at
10:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home