UK - Daily Echo - Letter
What about fluoride threat to our fish?
I AM pleased to hear that Hampshire Against Fluoridation will be able to force a debate with Southampton city councillors over the pending fluoridation scheme (Daily Echo, June 18). I for one hope that those pro-fluoride will change their minds.
There are enough questions still unanswered about the safety of fluoride in the long-term to put a case of 'reasonable doubt'.
Pro-fluoride councillors and those at the SHA who have not listened to the views of Southampton residents should take heed of the case in Canada of Dr Hardy Limebeck, head of the Dept of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, and until recently, Canada's leading promoter of fluoridation.
He has now completely withdrawn his support for the additive. Clearly, Dr. Limebeck had a cause for reasonable doubt too. As have others in Finland (kidney health), Japan and even USA who are proposing to lower the level to O.Tppm (In My View
- Stephen Peckham, Daily Echo, June 18).
Hard-headed councillors who cite that no health problems have arisen in 40 years of fluoridation should do some wider research and not just read the SHA report.
In 2009, my own reasonable doubt centred on the concern for
increased fluoride ending up in Southampton Water, ie the confluence of the rivers Test, Itchen, Hamble. (Echo, Nov 23, 2009; 'Oystermen express fears over fluoride effluent').
As yet, there are still unanswered questions over exactly what the effluents will hold in terms of fluoride concentration. Fluoride at 0.2ppm can affect migrating salmon. How can we be sure if the fluoride in the effluent plumes will affect the Test/Itchen salmon run, sea trout, bass or mullet until somebody has evaluated it properly, not just guessed the outcome?
As I pointed out to councillors at the City Court Leet in 2009 there will be more than 450 drums (100 tonnes) going into the water per annum. This is for a material that cannot be dumped at sea! OK for it to end up in Southampton Water though, no questions asked! If I were to dump just one drum per day off dockhead, I would be arrested and charged with a 'significant act of watercourse poisoning'. Maybe I should do that
- just to prove the point! STEVE MATTHEWS, Warsash.
I AM pleased to hear that Hampshire Against Fluoridation will be able to force a debate with Southampton city councillors over the pending fluoridation scheme (Daily Echo, June 18). I for one hope that those pro-fluoride will change their minds.
There are enough questions still unanswered about the safety of fluoride in the long-term to put a case of 'reasonable doubt'.
Pro-fluoride councillors and those at the SHA who have not listened to the views of Southampton residents should take heed of the case in Canada of Dr Hardy Limebeck, head of the Dept of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, and until recently, Canada's leading promoter of fluoridation.
He has now completely withdrawn his support for the additive. Clearly, Dr. Limebeck had a cause for reasonable doubt too. As have others in Finland (kidney health), Japan and even USA who are proposing to lower the level to O.Tppm (In My View
- Stephen Peckham, Daily Echo, June 18).
Hard-headed councillors who cite that no health problems have arisen in 40 years of fluoridation should do some wider research and not just read the SHA report.
In 2009, my own reasonable doubt centred on the concern for
increased fluoride ending up in Southampton Water, ie the confluence of the rivers Test, Itchen, Hamble. (Echo, Nov 23, 2009; 'Oystermen express fears over fluoride effluent').
As yet, there are still unanswered questions over exactly what the effluents will hold in terms of fluoride concentration. Fluoride at 0.2ppm can affect migrating salmon. How can we be sure if the fluoride in the effluent plumes will affect the Test/Itchen salmon run, sea trout, bass or mullet until somebody has evaluated it properly, not just guessed the outcome?
As I pointed out to councillors at the City Court Leet in 2009 there will be more than 450 drums (100 tonnes) going into the water per annum. This is for a material that cannot be dumped at sea! OK for it to end up in Southampton Water though, no questions asked! If I were to dump just one drum per day off dockhead, I would be arrested and charged with a 'significant act of watercourse poisoning'. Maybe I should do that
- just to prove the point! STEVE MATTHEWS, Warsash.
posted by Bill at
9:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home