UK - Lymington Times - Fluoride challenge in High Court showdown
Fluoride challenge in High Court showdown
A JUDICIAL review into whether fluoride will be added to Southampton's water supply, which would affect around 8,000 Totton residents, began on Wednesday.
The South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) gave its approval for the chemical to be added to the city's supply in 2009 after the city's primary care trust said it was needed to combat child tooth decay.
The plan affects 190,000 people around Southampton, including Totton because of the layout of the pipes.
The two-day legal challenge to the scheme, which is being made on behalf of Southampton resident Geraldine Milner, opened in the High Court on Wednesday, with the judge looking at whether the SHA examined all available evidence fully, as well as whether it listened properly to residents' views.
Ms Milner's counsel David Wolfe
told a judge that if the scheme goes ahead the mother of three teenagers would be left "with no choice taut to drink water to which fluoride has been added".
He told Mr Justice Holman this was contrary to government policy that no new fluoridation schemes should be introduced unless it could be shown that the local population was in favour.
Mr Wolfe also said the application for the judicial review was not about the actual merits and health arguments over fluoridation but was about the legality of the compulsory scheme, the first of its kind in the UK for 20 years.
Campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) travelled to London for the hearing and placard waving members also held a demonstration on the steps of the court.
Stephen Peckham, chairman of HAP, said: "Local anger about the SHA's decision has grown since 2009. People feel that fluoridation is being imposed on them without their consent or approval."It is not just local people—all local MPs and councils in the area affected by the scheme either oppose water fluoridation or have been critical of the decision made by the SHA.
"If Ms Milner had not taken this action the SHA would have just steam-rollered ahead with a total disregard for the evidence and local opinion. We should all be very grateful to her."
Dentist Zac Cox added: "Fluoridating our tap water is not only ineffective but it is also dangerous. The fact that the USA have decided to lower their fluoride levels indicates that they know it is dangerous, and are preparing themselves for lawsuits."
During the consultation 72% of responses were against fluoridation, but a MORI poll showed a different picture with only 38% opposed, compared with 32% in support.
A JUDICIAL review into whether fluoride will be added to Southampton's water supply, which would affect around 8,000 Totton residents, began on Wednesday.
The South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) gave its approval for the chemical to be added to the city's supply in 2009 after the city's primary care trust said it was needed to combat child tooth decay.
The plan affects 190,000 people around Southampton, including Totton because of the layout of the pipes.
The two-day legal challenge to the scheme, which is being made on behalf of Southampton resident Geraldine Milner, opened in the High Court on Wednesday, with the judge looking at whether the SHA examined all available evidence fully, as well as whether it listened properly to residents' views.
Ms Milner's counsel David Wolfe
told a judge that if the scheme goes ahead the mother of three teenagers would be left "with no choice taut to drink water to which fluoride has been added".
He told Mr Justice Holman this was contrary to government policy that no new fluoridation schemes should be introduced unless it could be shown that the local population was in favour.
Mr Wolfe also said the application for the judicial review was not about the actual merits and health arguments over fluoridation but was about the legality of the compulsory scheme, the first of its kind in the UK for 20 years.
Campaign group Hampshire Against Fluoridation (HAF) travelled to London for the hearing and placard waving members also held a demonstration on the steps of the court.
Stephen Peckham, chairman of HAP, said: "Local anger about the SHA's decision has grown since 2009. People feel that fluoridation is being imposed on them without their consent or approval."It is not just local people—all local MPs and councils in the area affected by the scheme either oppose water fluoridation or have been critical of the decision made by the SHA.
"If Ms Milner had not taken this action the SHA would have just steam-rollered ahead with a total disregard for the evidence and local opinion. We should all be very grateful to her."
Dentist Zac Cox added: "Fluoridating our tap water is not only ineffective but it is also dangerous. The fact that the USA have decided to lower their fluoride levels indicates that they know it is dangerous, and are preparing themselves for lawsuits."
During the consultation 72% of responses were against fluoridation, but a MORI poll showed a different picture with only 38% opposed, compared with 32% in support.
posted by Bill at
2:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home