Canada - Public water shouldn’t have unnecessary additives
Public water shouldn’t have unnecessary additives
By Letter to the Editor on October 12, 2013.
The hydrofluorosilicic acid debate in Lethbridge too often flows away from the most pressing concern regarding its addition to public water. Instead, the debate tends to pool around a ping-pong game of study versus study, and personal experience examples, such as the recent extreme example of the kid in Cochrane that had almost $5,000 of dental work, ostensibly due to being denied drinking water containing hydrofluorosilicic acid.
(For the record, here is my personal-story example. I have not used fluoridated toothpaste for about 10 years; I drink bottled water that has no fluoride rather than drink Lethbridge water, and the only added fluoride I may ingest might come from the odd alcoholic beverage. I do not accept any fluoride treatments from my dentist, and over the last decade I have had one little cavity. Should anyone really care about my personal experience, other than me? I think not. The same should be said for the Cochrane example).
Listening to those who argue that fluoride must be added to public water, it is hard to not get teary-eyed. What on God’s earth is the world coming to when one cannot get the hydrofluorosilic acid one is entitled to, as should be entrenched in our Charter of Rights. Indeed, listening to numerous health authorities, one gets the idea that the health and security of a nation is dependent on the free flow of fluoride.
Listen: hydrofluorosilicic acid could be the cure for cancer; a youth elixir; the key to world peace; or whatever other panacea one might want to imagine. That still would not warrant it being added to public drinking water. It only makes sense that those who want the stuff add it to their diet in consultation with their physician. It is not some rare substance – though highly toxic, it is an abundant by-product of phosphate mining. Adding it to public water saves the mining companies huge dollars dumping it as toxic waste, and instead they get to sell it off to communities that feel public water should deliver additives beyond those that make it potable. This issue is not worthy of plebiscite because a majority has no right to impose unnecessary additives and medications upon others. Public water is not the way to deliver anything – besides clean drinking water.
Karl-W Miller
Lethbridge
By Letter to the Editor on October 12, 2013.
The hydrofluorosilicic acid debate in Lethbridge too often flows away from the most pressing concern regarding its addition to public water. Instead, the debate tends to pool around a ping-pong game of study versus study, and personal experience examples, such as the recent extreme example of the kid in Cochrane that had almost $5,000 of dental work, ostensibly due to being denied drinking water containing hydrofluorosilicic acid.
(For the record, here is my personal-story example. I have not used fluoridated toothpaste for about 10 years; I drink bottled water that has no fluoride rather than drink Lethbridge water, and the only added fluoride I may ingest might come from the odd alcoholic beverage. I do not accept any fluoride treatments from my dentist, and over the last decade I have had one little cavity. Should anyone really care about my personal experience, other than me? I think not. The same should be said for the Cochrane example).
Listening to those who argue that fluoride must be added to public water, it is hard to not get teary-eyed. What on God’s earth is the world coming to when one cannot get the hydrofluorosilic acid one is entitled to, as should be entrenched in our Charter of Rights. Indeed, listening to numerous health authorities, one gets the idea that the health and security of a nation is dependent on the free flow of fluoride.
Listen: hydrofluorosilicic acid could be the cure for cancer; a youth elixir; the key to world peace; or whatever other panacea one might want to imagine. That still would not warrant it being added to public drinking water. It only makes sense that those who want the stuff add it to their diet in consultation with their physician. It is not some rare substance – though highly toxic, it is an abundant by-product of phosphate mining. Adding it to public water saves the mining companies huge dollars dumping it as toxic waste, and instead they get to sell it off to communities that feel public water should deliver additives beyond those that make it potable. This issue is not worthy of plebiscite because a majority has no right to impose unnecessary additives and medications upon others. Public water is not the way to deliver anything – besides clean drinking water.
Karl-W Miller
Lethbridge
posted by Bill at
10:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home