.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Friday, June 22, 2018

NZ - Letters: Fluoride - the right to choose

Darrell Grace (Letters; June 14) claims that water fluoridation has benefits.

Mary Byrne (Letters; June 17) makes clear how Darrell Grace is wrong with his claims about tooth decay statistics.

Examples from the 2015-16 NZ Dental School Statistics include children from non-fluoridated Christchurch and Nelson-Marlborough with less tooth decay than those from fluoridated Auckland and Counties Manukau; and non-fluoridated New Plymouth had less tooth decay than fluoridated Hawera.

Even the World Health Organisation statistics demonstrate there is no discernible difference in tooth decay between developed countries that fluoridate their water and those that do not, with a general trend of decline in overall rates of decay in developed countries.

The studies Mr Grace alludes to are not the ones that point out that hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFA) is toxic [NZ Hazchem Class 6 (acutely toxic ) 7 (dangerous poison) & 8 (corrosive)]. HFA is also laced with a range of other heavy metals including aluminium, arsenic, lead, mercury and uranium, and fluoride is classed as more toxic than lead.

In the United States, fluoride toothpaste is not recommended for babies and children under three years.

At the end of the day, it is about choice. It is unfair to those who don't wish to drink fluoridated water to be forced to buy water.




Post a Comment

<< Home