UK - Daily Echo
Fluoridation By Jon Reeves
HEALTH bosses have been accused of wanting to use Hampshire residents as "guinea pigs" to test if putting fluoride in tap water causes damage to teeth, the Daily Echo can reveal.
The Department of Health hopes the controversial scheme in Southampton and the surrounding areas will help with studies into a condition called dental fluorosis. Angry opponents have described it as an "obscene experiment" that means young children could suffer problems with their teeth for the sake of research.
The plans to put fluoride into tap water delivered to nearly 200,000 homes are currently on hold because of a legal challenge.
CAMPAIGNERS have accused health bosses of wanting to use Hampshire residents as "guinea pigs" to test if fluoridating water causes damage to teeth, the Daily Echo can reveal.
The Department of Health (DoH) hopes the controversial scheme to add the chemical to tap water in and around Southampton will help with studies into dental fluorosis -which in extreme cases can cause mottling and pitting of teeth.
Angry opponents say it means children will be subjected to problems with their teeth for the sake of research.
As reported, the plans to put fluoride in tap water delivered to nearly 200,000 homes in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams are currently on hold because of a legal challenge.
Southampton mum Gerri Milner last month lost a judicial review against South Central Strategic Health Authority's (SHA) decision to approve the scheme despite widespread public opposition.
But she has since lodged an appeal against the High Court judge's ruling the authority's board members properly assessed all the evidence for and against fluoridation.
The SHA approved the scheme after "m
Southampton City Primary Care Trust asked it to consider introducing ' it in a bid to improve children's dental health. But opponents argue too much fluoride can lead to side effects, including fluorosis, which can range from slight discoloration of teeth to the cracking of enamel.
In a freedom of information request, the DoH was asked about the research that has been carried out into fluorosis since the Medical Research Council recommended in a 2002 study on fluoridation that more work be done looking at the problem.
The response said a "major current research project into the extent and severity of dental fluorosis" is currently being supported, which it is thought will cost £700,000.
It added: "As the Systematic Review of Water Fluoridation indicated, a new fluoridation scheme would provide an excellent opportunity to undertake prospective research and we are keeping closely in touch with developments on the proposed scheme for Southampton." Doug Cross, from UK Councils Against Fluoridation said research should have been done before a new scheme, not once it is in place.
He said: "Clearly the intent is to monitor the effects of this proposed new fluoridation project on the population of Southampton. "In real terms, this means it will concentrate principally on children, since older people already either have or do not have fluorosis -it's contracted either in the womb or during the first five or so years of childhood.
"So the children will be the guinea pigs in this obscene experiment."
New Forest East MP Julian Lewis, who has campaigned against the fluoridation scheme, said he could now raise the issue with ministers. He said: "Are they suggesting this scheme should go ahead to help them carry out research? If that's the case, it's outrageously arrogant.
"I'll be examining the response in detail, with a view to raising questions about it in Parliament."
Hampshire Against Fluoridation chairman Stephen Peckham said research already shows that increased fluoride in water leads to more cases of fluorosis. He said: "We know that water fluoridation substantially increases levels of dental fluorosis. Existing studies in other countries and the UK demonstrate that unequivocally.
"Some children are going to get fluorosis that will damage their teeth, and the whole scheme, from that point of view, is wrong. "We shouldn't be pursuing a scheme on the basis of doing research."
HEALTH bosses have been accused of wanting to use Hampshire residents as "guinea pigs" to test if putting fluoride in tap water causes damage to teeth, the Daily Echo can reveal.
The Department of Health hopes the controversial scheme in Southampton and the surrounding areas will help with studies into a condition called dental fluorosis. Angry opponents have described it as an "obscene experiment" that means young children could suffer problems with their teeth for the sake of research.
The plans to put fluoride into tap water delivered to nearly 200,000 homes are currently on hold because of a legal challenge.
CAMPAIGNERS have accused health bosses of wanting to use Hampshire residents as "guinea pigs" to test if fluoridating water causes damage to teeth, the Daily Echo can reveal.
The Department of Health (DoH) hopes the controversial scheme to add the chemical to tap water in and around Southampton will help with studies into dental fluorosis -which in extreme cases can cause mottling and pitting of teeth.
Angry opponents say it means children will be subjected to problems with their teeth for the sake of research.
As reported, the plans to put fluoride in tap water delivered to nearly 200,000 homes in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams are currently on hold because of a legal challenge.
Southampton mum Gerri Milner last month lost a judicial review against South Central Strategic Health Authority's (SHA) decision to approve the scheme despite widespread public opposition.
But she has since lodged an appeal against the High Court judge's ruling the authority's board members properly assessed all the evidence for and against fluoridation.
The SHA approved the scheme after "m
Southampton City Primary Care Trust asked it to consider introducing ' it in a bid to improve children's dental health. But opponents argue too much fluoride can lead to side effects, including fluorosis, which can range from slight discoloration of teeth to the cracking of enamel.
In a freedom of information request, the DoH was asked about the research that has been carried out into fluorosis since the Medical Research Council recommended in a 2002 study on fluoridation that more work be done looking at the problem.
The response said a "major current research project into the extent and severity of dental fluorosis" is currently being supported, which it is thought will cost £700,000.
It added: "As the Systematic Review of Water Fluoridation indicated, a new fluoridation scheme would provide an excellent opportunity to undertake prospective research and we are keeping closely in touch with developments on the proposed scheme for Southampton." Doug Cross, from UK Councils Against Fluoridation said research should have been done before a new scheme, not once it is in place.
He said: "Clearly the intent is to monitor the effects of this proposed new fluoridation project on the population of Southampton. "In real terms, this means it will concentrate principally on children, since older people already either have or do not have fluorosis -it's contracted either in the womb or during the first five or so years of childhood.
"So the children will be the guinea pigs in this obscene experiment."
New Forest East MP Julian Lewis, who has campaigned against the fluoridation scheme, said he could now raise the issue with ministers. He said: "Are they suggesting this scheme should go ahead to help them carry out research? If that's the case, it's outrageously arrogant.
"I'll be examining the response in detail, with a view to raising questions about it in Parliament."
Hampshire Against Fluoridation chairman Stephen Peckham said research already shows that increased fluoride in water leads to more cases of fluorosis. He said: "We know that water fluoridation substantially increases levels of dental fluorosis. Existing studies in other countries and the UK demonstrate that unequivocally.
"Some children are going to get fluorosis that will damage their teeth, and the whole scheme, from that point of view, is wrong. "We shouldn't be pursuing a scheme on the basis of doing research."
posted by Bill at
9:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home