UK - Yorkshire
Children 'at risk' from
Date: 11 May 2010
I REFER to 'Benefits of fluoride are compelling' (YEP, May 3) and would comment as follows: The York Review 2000 was unable to support the claimed improvement in dental health in fluoridated areas.
They could only find 15 per cent. They did find 48 per cent of children in those areas had some degree of dental fluorosis and in 12.5 per cent the condition was severe enough to be "of concern".
Dental fluorosis is the outward sign of inward poisoning that occurs in children's teeth when they have received an overdose of fluoride.
It is unlikely that they will find the medical side-effects of flurodiation because, according to the information I have received, NHS hospitals are not equipped to look for them.
"No evidence of harm does not mean no risk of harm" (Democractic Health Network).
Miss P Johnson, Leeds
Once more the question of fluoride in our water raises its ugly head. I read a while ago that in some American states, it was agains the law to give children flouride toothpaste to clean their teeth and that toothpaste containing flouride must be labelled "poison".
It went on to say that states with fluoride in their tap water have a higher number of cancer patients.
Why then do we want to contaminate our tap water? We'd finish up having to buy bottled water just to make a cup of tea.
Teri B Halton, by email
Date: 11 May 2010
I REFER to 'Benefits of fluoride are compelling' (YEP, May 3) and would comment as follows: The York Review 2000 was unable to support the claimed improvement in dental health in fluoridated areas.
They could only find 15 per cent. They did find 48 per cent of children in those areas had some degree of dental fluorosis and in 12.5 per cent the condition was severe enough to be "of concern".
Dental fluorosis is the outward sign of inward poisoning that occurs in children's teeth when they have received an overdose of fluoride.
It is unlikely that they will find the medical side-effects of flurodiation because, according to the information I have received, NHS hospitals are not equipped to look for them.
"No evidence of harm does not mean no risk of harm" (Democractic Health Network).
Miss P Johnson, Leeds
Once more the question of fluoride in our water raises its ugly head. I read a while ago that in some American states, it was agains the law to give children flouride toothpaste to clean their teeth and that toothpaste containing flouride must be labelled "poison".
It went on to say that states with fluoride in their tap water have a higher number of cancer patients.
Why then do we want to contaminate our tap water? We'd finish up having to buy bottled water just to make a cup of tea.
Teri B Halton, by email
posted by Bill at
9:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home