Water NZ misleading the public
Friday, 21 October, 2011 - 04:47 Murray Gibb, of Water NZ, has "parroted the standard propaganda script provided by the Ministry of Health in relation to the ending of fluoridation in New Plymouth. Not one of his claims of safety or benefit is supported by sound scientific evidence", says Mark Atkin, founder of FluoridegateNZ Legal Action.
"Fluoridation policy is outside the scope of Water NZ's constitution, so these are just his personal views: Water NZ cannot have an official position on this", Mr Atkin points out.
But Mr Gibb's reference to Water NZ raises the important question "why is a private organization setting the purity standard for water fluoridation compounds, when other food additive standards are set by Government?" It is the same in the USA.
"How did Water NZ decide that contaminated industrial grade waste fluoride was an acceptable 'purity' standard for putting in the public water supply? No food additive is allowed this level of contamination", points out Mr Atkin.
One contaminant is Arsenic, which is listed as a known carcinogen. The Ministry of Health claims the extra Arsenic will cause less than one extra cancer death per year. "So the Ministry, and Water NZ, believe it is acceptable to kill someone from cancer every 2 or 3 years so we can use a cheap contaminated source of fluoride, rather than a food grade one. Is this attitude acceptable to the NZ public, who are drinking the stuff?" asks Mr Atkin. "I am sure they don't even know!"
"The reality is that if a food grade fluoride were required, it would be too expensive", says Mr Atkin. "That would mean industry would have no easy waste disposal avenue - the public water supply - for its toxic waste." Brent Manning of New Plymouth Council recently said that the water supply is the only viable way for it to dispose of the remaining fluoride stock. "That one statement speaks volumes", suggests Mr Atkin. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also said that fluoridation is a good solution to industry's fluoride waste disposal problem.
Water NZ's membership includes corporates, who appear to have a dominance in voting rights. "This seedy-looking scenario warrants further investigation", proposes Mr Atkin.
"Fluoridation policy is outside the scope of Water NZ's constitution, so these are just his personal views: Water NZ cannot have an official position on this", Mr Atkin points out.
But Mr Gibb's reference to Water NZ raises the important question "why is a private organization setting the purity standard for water fluoridation compounds, when other food additive standards are set by Government?" It is the same in the USA.
"How did Water NZ decide that contaminated industrial grade waste fluoride was an acceptable 'purity' standard for putting in the public water supply? No food additive is allowed this level of contamination", points out Mr Atkin.
One contaminant is Arsenic, which is listed as a known carcinogen. The Ministry of Health claims the extra Arsenic will cause less than one extra cancer death per year. "So the Ministry, and Water NZ, believe it is acceptable to kill someone from cancer every 2 or 3 years so we can use a cheap contaminated source of fluoride, rather than a food grade one. Is this attitude acceptable to the NZ public, who are drinking the stuff?" asks Mr Atkin. "I am sure they don't even know!"
"The reality is that if a food grade fluoride were required, it would be too expensive", says Mr Atkin. "That would mean industry would have no easy waste disposal avenue - the public water supply - for its toxic waste." Brent Manning of New Plymouth Council recently said that the water supply is the only viable way for it to dispose of the remaining fluoride stock. "That one statement speaks volumes", suggests Mr Atkin. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also said that fluoridation is a good solution to industry's fluoride waste disposal problem.
Water NZ's membership includes corporates, who appear to have a dominance in voting rights. "This seedy-looking scenario warrants further investigation", proposes Mr Atkin.
posted by Bill at
9:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home