News RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos


Hampshire Against Fluoridation take fight to Downing Street


THEY feel their views have been ignored and so wanted to make their voices heard where it matters most.

And, with 15,000 names echoing their anger, campaigners fighting controversial plans to add fluoride to Hampshire tap water supplies yesterday knocked on the world’s most famous front door demanding action.

Having visited the Prime Minister’s home in Downing Street, they marched to the Department of Health carrying banners and even a decorated umbrella, before treading the hallowed corridors of power in Parliament urging MPs to back their cause.

Hampshire Against Fluoridation head to London

The 30 members of Hampshire Against Fluoridation received an unexpected boost when Southampton Test MP Alan Whitehead told the All Paliamentary Group Against Fluoridation that he too believes it must be put on hold because so many people are against it.

Despite both being personally in favour of fluoridation to improve children’s teeth, his calls for a rethink mirrored those of fellow city MP John Denham in yesterday’s Daily Echo.

It means all parliamentary representatives for the parts of Southampton, E a s t l e i g h , Totton, Netley and Rownhams affected by the fluoridation plans are now united in saying South Central Strategic Health Authority’s decision should be reviewed.

For the campaigners who had made the trip to London, it was news they were delighted to hear.

“It’s been really worthwhile,”

said HAF member Stephen Peckham.

“Not only did we get the chance to take 15,000 local people’s signatures up to 10 Downing Street, to show their disgust at what is happening, but we forged some really good alliances and this is a platform for taking things forward.

Follow the Southern Daily Echo on Twitter

“Particularly, Alan was saying he’s willing to work together with the other MPs to bring this to the attention of the Department of Health and put pressure on the SHA.”

Health chiefs at the SHA unanimously backed fluoridation for nearly 200,000 homes earlier this year, in a bid to improve Southampton’s poor dental health record. The decision came after a 14-week public consultation, in which the SHA says it listened to residents and examined all the scientific evidence as it was legally required to.

But opponents say the public will was ignored.

Almost three-quarters of respondents living in the affected area were against fluoridation, while 38 per cent opposed it in a separate phone survey, compared to 32 per cent in favour.

“I don’t think the balance that was arrived at by the SHA actually stands in line with the legislation,” said Dr Whitehead.

“Therefore it would be a good idea for the implementation at least to be put on hold until there is a better balance.”


Comments(17)

Paramjit Bahia says...
10:36am Wed 10 Jun 09

“Therefore it would be a good idea for the implementation at least to be put on hold until there is a better balance.”
It does not give me any pleasure to publicly disagree with Alan Whitehead MP’s above statement. Exceptionally intelligent person like him should know that in democratic society SHA has ignored the majority that is opposed to Fluoridation of their water. The arrogance of this Qango is insulting our democracy.
So rather than saying that plan “be put on hold until there is a better balance” our representatives in Parliament should be demanding action against Quango members and scrapping of their decision.
Instead of doing that both John Denham and Alan Whitehead are playing the EU type tricks over Lisbon i.e. ‘Till Irish voters vote in favour keep on repeating the process’. Not surprising considering both of them also ignored their manifesto commitment to hold referendum on EU constitution and now John is even quite on Mandelson’s obsession of selling part of Royal Mail, which New Labour had pledged to keep in public ownership

Saints Mike says...
10:59am Wed 10 Jun 09

So they consulted nearly 200,000 homes earlier this year, The decision came after a 14-week public consultation, in which the SHA says it listened to residents. ]
Did they knock my door, stop me in the street,post me a questionnaire, e-mail me or ring my phone. Consultation took 14 weeks and I heard nothing.
Did I disappear off the face of the planet for 14 weeks? No I waited and I waited to be consulted but nothing.
Almost three-quarters of respondents living in the affected area were against fluoridation, well if they had bothered to contact me in any way, shape or form I would have supported the plans. The process of the consultation in htis case is WELL WRONG, SHA were supposed to ask people for their views, to respond to the replies, to make a decision based on those replies, clearly this has not been the case. I am in favour of fluoridation, but I think the all people that will be drinking this water should have been asked, not some suit in SHA who probably lives in the New Forest or other unaffected area.
SORT IT OUT

banhammer says...
11:05am Wed 10 Jun 09

When will people realise that Flouride is harmless?

steve7676 says...
11:13am Wed 10 Jun 09

These types of people refuse to look at the science.They accept the antifluoride group as part of politics and look for a angle to push their agenda thru.Disgusting.

Red1918 says...
11:39am Wed 10 Jun 09

The response of Denham and Whitehead on this issue is a typical gutless New Labour approach when faced with organised middle class voters.
Fluoride is a class issue.
For the affluent, educated, middle classes dental health is not a great issue because they understand about proper diets and can afford dental care when needed. Poor working class children are often fed food that is detrimental to their health, particularly teeth, and often never see a dentist from one year to the next.
Denham and Whitehead should have come out strongly in favour of this crucial public health issue and not acted like the cowardly New Labour MP's they have become.
If they belive this will save their miserable skins next year ythey will be sadly mistaken. Thes eupset middle calls voters will revert to their natural Tory home - and as for the mass of working clas voters their action will be the same as for the Euro elections, with nobody to represent them they will stay at home.

bri21 says...
11:40am Wed 10 Jun 09

Fluoride is not harmless Banhammer. Had you troubled yourself to inquire you might have discovered that for yourself and also discovered how fluoride is correctly spelt.

Does not fill me with confidence that yours is the most scientific approach to this topic.

Employed by the NHS by any chance?

banhammer says...
12:02pm Wed 10 Jun 09

bri21 wrote:
Fluoride is not harmless Banhammer. Had you troubled yourself to inquire you might have discovered that for yourself and also discovered how fluoride is correctly spelt. Does not fill me with confidence that yours is the most scientific approach to this topic. Employed by the NHS by any chance?
Im sorry i made a typo, i hope you can forgive me for such a error, im sure you will find most joy in nit picking my reply for anymore grammitcal and spalling erors. I see your only arguement for the case of fluoride being a "poison" is my bad spelling its you who needs to do some research. Congrats on a great point thou. xxx

Polygonia says...
12:26pm Wed 10 Jun 09

I was on the protest march and I feel that the day was worth while. I am pleased that there may be some change of heart or at least a stay of execution on the matter.
The recent success of
a so called "fringe party" in the Euro Elections may make our politicians realise that they are accountable to us and responsible for our welfare.

banhammer says...
12:30pm Wed 10 Jun 09

Polygonia wrote:
I was on the protest march and I feel that the day was worth while. I am pleased that there may be some change of heart or at least a stay of execution on the matter. The recent success of a so called "fringe party" in the Euro Elections may make our politicians realise that they are accountable to us and responsible for our welfare.
Whilst shouting your protests did all your teeth fall out?

goard says...
12:43pm Wed 10 Jun 09

So, yet again, the issue of Fluoride is being put under the gaze of the South Central Strategic Health Authority - yet another GREAT expense when the general public have said NO to fluoride. What happens if the Health Authority say 'no to us' and 'yes' to SHA. or are we under a long and protracted Enquiry with god knows how much is spent when we said NO!

goard

bri21 says...
1:13pm Wed 10 Jun 09

It's not difficult banhammer. For people with an open mind the logic is easy to understand.

Someone who cannot take the trouble to spell correctly probably hasn't taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the facts of the fluoride issue either. Simple!

Instead you resort to the age-old tactic of the loser by resorting to abuse. (Teeth falling out etc.) You really must do better.

BTW, I'm in my 70th year and have all my original equipment, including teeth.

Polygonia says...
1:23pm Wed 10 Jun 09

banhammer wrote:
Polygonia wrote: I was on the protest march and I feel that the day was worth while. I am pleased that there may be some change of heart or at least a stay of execution on the matter. The recent success of a so called "fringe party" in the Euro Elections may make our politicians realise that they are accountable to us and responsible for our welfare.
Whilst shouting your protests did all your teeth fall out?
I never mentioned shouting, in fact I did not do any, our banner, actions and the petition spoke for us, and we spoke at the debate in The Palace of Westminster.

Calli says...
3:19pm Wed 10 Jun 09

Thank goodness it seems like we may have a stay of execution. Thankyou Hampshire Against Fluoridation for having the determination to take this injustice to London. When will Dentists and Doctors, instead of following their establishments like sheep, open their minds and accept the possibility that they may just have been following the old chestnut 'It must be ok because we've always been told it is'. Well, who told you all it was ok? The Government funded York Review concluded that they could not safely say there was no harm - so who on God's earth thinks they have the right to ignore this respected body? Even if it was ok I want the right to decide what I put in my body.

banhammer says...
5:00pm Wed 10 Jun 09

bri21 wrote:
It's not difficult banhammer. For people with an open mind the logic is easy to understand. Someone who cannot take the trouble to spell correctly probably hasn't taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the facts of the fluoride issue either. Simple! Instead you resort to the age-old tactic of the loser by resorting to abuse. (Teeth falling out etc.) You really must do better. BTW, I'm in my 70th year and have all my original equipment, including teeth.
Have you ever considered that people are not as adept at English as yourself? But are in other fields, like myself, Mathematics. So you are going to discount my views on this because i cant spell correctly, what a bigot you are considering you cant work out how to use the "quote" button. Flouride has never been proven to cause any harm this is FACT. Its just scare-mongering from toothless simpletons.

Swalk says...
8:42pm Wed 10 Jun 09

That isn't a very mathematical argument - saying that fluoride has never been proved to be unsafe means nothing. To win the argument, you have to prove that it is safe and no, that isn't the same thing

Calli says...
11:28pm Wed 10 Jun 09

Banhammer, Can I ask if you would watch the DVD made by professionals, one being the Chief Dental Officer for Toronto and many more on why Fluoridation is not good. The problem is that some people, having grown up with the word in their everyday conversation makes them think its perfectly normal. Whereas, in actual fact this substance was introduced to the public because the big American Companies who spurted out this stuff as by
-products of aluminum smelting and phosphate fertilizer production couldn't dump it without incurring alot of cost. As it seemed to work topically on the teeth they 'sold' the idea to the Public Health Dept. There was never any trials etc before this stuff was put in and because its always been done no one has questioned it. Any seemingly beneficial effect has been purely coincidental. Studies between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas have come up with no difference. Its easy to find this all out. In published books and on the net. Please question don't accept. And even if this stuff was good I would not expect everyone to have it. It is not ethical to mass medicate. Yes, it is mass medication because the SHA are supposedly trying to prevent. The DVD can be obtained by contacting Hampshire Against Fluoridation - although they did not make it.

banhammer says...
11:14am Thu 11 Jun 09

Calli wrote:
Banhammer, Can I ask if you would watch the DVD made by professionals, one being the Chief Dental Officer for Toronto and many more on why Fluoridation is not good. The problem is that some people, having grown up with the word in their everyday conversation makes them think its perfectly normal. Whereas, in actual fact this substance was introduced to the public because the big American Companies who spurted out this stuff as by -products of aluminum smelting and phosphate fertilizer production couldn't dump it without incurring alot of cost. As it seemed to work topically on the teeth they 'sold' the idea to the Public Health Dept. There was never any trials etc before this stuff was put in and because its always been done no one has questioned it. Any seemingly beneficial effect has been purely coincidental. Studies between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas have come up with no difference. Its easy to find this all out. In published books and on the net. Please question don't accept. And even if this stuff was good I would not expect everyone to have it. It is not ethical to mass medicate. Yes, it is mass medication because the SHA are supposedly trying to prevent. The DVD can be obtained by contacting Hampshire Against Fluoridation - although they did not make it.
I have questioned and accept its fine. Thanks.


Southampton's fluoride row goes to Number 10 Southampton's fluoride row goes to Number 10

Most popular






Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses