UK - Daily Echo - Would fluoride fund be better spent elsewhere?

Would fluoride fund be better spent elsewhere?
CONSIDERING the recent news from the USA regarding the 41 per cent of children and teenagers with "rampant fluorosis of the teeth" in their country due to ingesting too much fluoride, and the decision by the Department of Health and Human
Services in the USA to lower the levels from over Ippm to 0.07 ppm, can we assume that the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) will take note of this and abandon their own hare brained scheme to poison us all?
Southampton already has 0.08 ppm naturally occurring in the water and to add any more would expose the very children, the SHA purport to protect, to levels now known to be unsafe.
I hope they have also heard the other breaking news from that same country that the Environmental Protection Agency is to cease the use of sulfuryl fluoride as a food fumigant because it has been found that too much of the chemical is being ingested and is putting health at risk, especially children.
With all the cutbacks needed in these cash-strapped times one wonders if the £400,000 of NHS money the SHA has on hold to fight any objection to their "mass medicating" scheme would be better spent on other essential services.
Mrs PLACE, Southampton.