UK - Daily Echo - Letters
Statistics Can mislead
LETTERS contributor Bill Edmunds notes 75 per cent of Irish children have experienced tooth decay (Letters, May 24), and points out that Ireland fluoridates its water.
However, this proves nothing - the number for non-fluoridated Northern Ireland was 81 per cent.
Bill also mentions a 700 per cent increase in
fluorosis in Irish 15-year-olds since 1984.
Looking at the original report, the non-fluoridated areas saw a 2,800 per cent increase -this is a classic statistical trick to exaggerate changes in small numbers.
D R Smith tells us 72 per cent of people in the area oppose fluoridation. This was indeed the proportion of negative respondents to the consultation -however, those opposed to fluoridation might be more inclined to respond. I have much more sympathy for the "democracy" argument but the true opposition rate is more like 38 per cent (based on a telephone survey of 2,000 people) and even that will have been inflated by the confusing misuse of statistics by campaigners.
TIM RETOUT, Southampton.
Stop this waste of money
WITH the current emphasis on cutting waste, I note that the attempt to force water fluoridation on Southampton is continuing, with a date now set for the first hearing of the Judicial Review (November 3).
This is wasting £400,000 of taxpayers' (our) money to force us to have something that we do not want. 72 per cent opposed fluoridation in the so-called public consultation.
I am glad to hear that South Central Strategic Health Authority is to be abolished in 2012. They are the ones behind this bad science, unethical behaviour and waste of money While I sympathise with the good people in the authority, the ineptitude of the board has meant that they deserve to be consigned to the dustbin of history. However they still seem determined to push fluoridation through to leave us with a toxic legacy.
Will the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats now instruct the health authorities to stop wasting our money on water fluoridation? Or have they forgotten what they promised just before the elections?
JOHN SPOTTISWOODE,
Southampton,
We don't want it - fact!
MR Tim Retout (Letters, May 24) expresses the view that while he is disinterested whether fluoride is introduced to our water or not, he does resent the use of quotations of scientific research. For or against, usually out of context. He then uses approximately 8½ column inches doing precisely that, in favour of fluoride introduction.
Hopefully he will have read my little article, which was inset into his, which expresses the only incontrovertible fact based on such surveys as have been done - we do not want it!
Short of a full referendum, that's all that should be necessary
MR D R SMITH, Bitterne, Southampton.
LETTERS contributor Bill Edmunds notes 75 per cent of Irish children have experienced tooth decay (Letters, May 24), and points out that Ireland fluoridates its water.
However, this proves nothing - the number for non-fluoridated Northern Ireland was 81 per cent.
Bill also mentions a 700 per cent increase in
fluorosis in Irish 15-year-olds since 1984.
Looking at the original report, the non-fluoridated areas saw a 2,800 per cent increase -this is a classic statistical trick to exaggerate changes in small numbers.
D R Smith tells us 72 per cent of people in the area oppose fluoridation. This was indeed the proportion of negative respondents to the consultation -however, those opposed to fluoridation might be more inclined to respond. I have much more sympathy for the "democracy" argument but the true opposition rate is more like 38 per cent (based on a telephone survey of 2,000 people) and even that will have been inflated by the confusing misuse of statistics by campaigners.
TIM RETOUT, Southampton.
Stop this waste of money
WITH the current emphasis on cutting waste, I note that the attempt to force water fluoridation on Southampton is continuing, with a date now set for the first hearing of the Judicial Review (November 3).
This is wasting £400,000 of taxpayers' (our) money to force us to have something that we do not want. 72 per cent opposed fluoridation in the so-called public consultation.
I am glad to hear that South Central Strategic Health Authority is to be abolished in 2012. They are the ones behind this bad science, unethical behaviour and waste of money While I sympathise with the good people in the authority, the ineptitude of the board has meant that they deserve to be consigned to the dustbin of history. However they still seem determined to push fluoridation through to leave us with a toxic legacy.
Will the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats now instruct the health authorities to stop wasting our money on water fluoridation? Or have they forgotten what they promised just before the elections?
JOHN SPOTTISWOODE,
Southampton,
We don't want it - fact!
MR Tim Retout (Letters, May 24) expresses the view that while he is disinterested whether fluoride is introduced to our water or not, he does resent the use of quotations of scientific research. For or against, usually out of context. He then uses approximately 8½ column inches doing precisely that, in favour of fluoride introduction.
Hopefully he will have read my little article, which was inset into his, which expresses the only incontrovertible fact based on such surveys as have been done - we do not want it!
Short of a full referendum, that's all that should be necessary
MR D R SMITH, Bitterne, Southampton.
posted by Bill at
9:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home