Protesters call for change of mind over fluoridation of water (From Daily Echo)

Good news... I for one am glad that they've delayed the programme... Now let's hope they can overturn the South Central SHA and sack the lot of them for wasting public money that they could have spent on providing more NHS dentists!

soton-mike80 wrote:
Good news... I for one am glad that they've delayed the programme... Now let's hope they can overturn the South Central SHA and sack the lot of them for wasting public money that they could have spent on providing more NHS dentists!

Here here.Unfortunately those elected to serve the public seldom seem to take decisions that are supported by their electorate.
We should be able to vote them all in or out every year.

It is highly medically unethical to force people to drink a chemical via the public water supplies. This is true even if the chemical does do good - which is not proven, and even if it was proven to be safe, which fluoride is not. As the Board members of the Health Authority are not elected but appointed, we have to hold to account the politicians who have the responsibility.

This means we must vote only for local and national election candidates who whole-heartedly oppose water fluoridation.

"listen to the People" is fine unless the people are misinformed!!

What is really needed here are some hard facts, not the emotive rantings that both sides are currently involved in.

Our government has the cheek to lecture the world on democracy, because here at home although overwhelming majority during consultation expressed opposition to adding poisonous fluoride to our drinking water, unelected South Central Strategic Health Authority has completely ignored that decision. To add insult to the injury the Quango has earmarked £400,000 for wasting on legal fight while the government is short of funds, because it has given all the nation had to the bankers.
Hypocrite government should be telling the Quango to behave itself or face same consequences as the enemies of democracy it is bombing in Afghanistan.

Crazywolf wrote:
"listen to the People" is fine unless the people are misinformed!!

What is really needed here are some hard facts, not the emotive rantings that both sides are currently involved in.

You imply "the people" are misinformed. Far from it I would say. The opposition to this attempted poisoning is both well informed of the “hard facts” and present them in a clear and concise way – not “emotive rantings” as you say. Even the unelected and undemocratic SHA can not be accused of “emotive rantings”

Why is everyone perfectly happy to drink chlorine in their water, which has been put into our water for years. (Some is left behind after filtration). Is it a) because people have made a detailed anaysis of the relative toxicology and determined that chlorine is less harmful, b) because they didn't know it was there c) because they hadn't actually thought about the dichotomy.
This is why it's dangerous to let "the people" decide - if "people" don't inform themselves properly they are prone to every scaremongering american bible freak, conspiracy theorist and left wing eco warrior to exploit their ignorance.

What parent in his / her right mind, would let their child drink something which contains 'Sodium Fluoride'. which would have serious effects on them in adult life. As the old saw has it. - you can lead a horse to water,- but you can't make it drink.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Our government has the cheek to lecture the world on democracy, because here at home although overwhelming majority during consultation expressed opposition to adding poisonous fluoride to our drinking water, unelected South Central Strategic Health Authority has completely ignored that decision. To add insult to the injury the Quango has earmarked £400,000 for wasting on legal fight while the government is short of funds, because it has given all the nation had to the bankers.
Hypocrite government should be telling the Quango to behave itself or face same consequences as the enemies of democracy it is bombing in Afghanistan.

Where is the evidence of the "over whelming" majority. What is that a finger in the air job you or the Echo.
.
You would not be logging on to your computer if the banks throughout the world were not bailed out.
.
The last paragraph is somewhat nonsensicle

Chlorine is used to treat the water to make it potable. Fluoride is used to treat the human body. Doctors cannot force one person to take a drug, yet the government wants to force everyone to be drugged against their will and with no medical supervision.
Fluoridation is an absolute waste of tax money. Fluoridation is insanely inefficient with 99.5% of fluoridated water going down the drain in toilets, showers, dishwashers, washing machines, etc. thereby wasting 99.5% of the chemical cost. People only drink 0.5% of the water they use.

For example, for every $1000 of fluoride chemical added to water, $995 would be directly wasted down the drain, $5 would be consumed in water by the people, and less than $2.50 would be consumed by children. Can you think of a more wasteful government program?

A plan to give away fluoride tablets free to whoever wants them would be much, much cheaper. Then the rest of us would not be drugged against our will and the environment would be protected.

My congratulations to the protesters. I was at the St Mary's Stadium when the unpopular decision was announced, and most of the audience were disgusted. I do not see the need for fluoride , the evidence on children's teeth was flawed and I hope that the SHA are made to "eat their words" washed down with a glass of fluoride.

jwillie I know what chlorine is for. What difference does that make if you are being given it against your will (or knowledge, in the case of most posters?). Your idea of giving away fluoride tablets is an interesting one. Unfortunately the kind of parents who let their chindren's teeth decay through feeding them sunny delight and other junk are not the kind who would voluntarily pick up fluoride tablets. Maybe we should fluoridate carbonated soft drinks :-)

The experts recommend flouridation of the water.
A group of agitated housewives read a couple of opinions in one of their women's magazines, and think they know best, so start a campaign.

Some nutter wrote a paper blaming the MMR vaccination for all kinds of problems with children.
Despite the General Medical Council denying the claim, many parents did not allow their children to have the jab, which resulted in many suffering from Mumps, Measles or Rubella.
Now that 'the horse has bolted' they are wanting their children to have the MMR jab.
In this instance, I accept what the experts say.
I'm for flouridation.

I think we all agree that we should listen to the experts. The latest research study to prove that fluoridation is ineffective was recently published by a dentist in the main U.S. Dental Journal (JADA). You should go read it yourself. Considering the severe health destruction caused by fluoridation, one must follow the money trail and see who is getting rich to find any reason to use it.
____________________
____________________
_________________
"JADA Study Proves Fluoridation is Money down the Drain"
NEW YORK, Sept. 29, 2009
Children's cavity rates are similar whether water is fluoridated or not, according to data published in the July 2009 Journal of the American Dental Association by dentist J.V. Kumar of the NY State Health Department(1),
(http://www.prnewswi
re.com/news-releases
/jada-study-proves-f
luoridation-is-money
-down-the-drain-6257
2357.html)
____________________
____________________
_________________
Those promoting fluoridation simply refuse to read the current research showing it is ineffective and dangerous to health. Go to (www.fluoridealert.o
rg) and read several scientific articles.
Read the letter from Dr. Hardy Limeback ( DDS, PhD Biochemistry) --- Head, Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto entitled "Why I am now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water"
He was the principal research advisor to the Canadian Dental Asociation for over 10 years in promoting fluoridation. His letter is an apology to other dentists and the public.
Dr. Limeback includes over 140 Research studies, including:
Increased risk of bone cancer -- 13 studies
Lead, arsenic, radium contaminants causing toxic water -- 10 studies
Link with fluoride and other cancer -- 12 studies
Fluoride causes birth defects -- 5
Fluoride affects the immune systems -- 12
Fluoride is neurotoxic (brain, nerves, lowering IQ) -- 11
Etc.
Also see the petition signed by over 2700 professionals opposing fluoridation.

The fluoride added to drinking water is a by-product of the phosphate fertiliser industry - see the SHA Consultation Document where you will find this information as an insert in small print. It is totally offensive to call people who challenge decisions they think are unethical "agitated housewives". Protesters are generally well informed and have studied the evidence for themselves. The government's own systematic overview of all the research found that there were few high quality studies and that "no confident statements can be made on the efficacy or safety of water fluoridation". On this basis, the precautionary principle must apply and people are right to question "the experts" who insist on defending an unethical policy that they themselves admit can cause fluorosis in a percentage of children.

and all because some lazy parents don't look after their kids' teeth.

Condor Man wrote:
and all because some lazy parents don't look after their kids' teeth.

Or because some, yes some not all dentists were making money through 'drill and fill'. I was unlucky to visit one of them.
I understand these days they are getting more for extractions, so some crooks are on to that game.
Best protection for the teeth is brushing and sticking with a good honest dentist, not drinking poison.

Lone Ranger wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: Our government has the cheek to lecture the world on democracy, because here at home although overwhelming majority during consultation expressed opposition to adding poisonous fluoride to our drinking water, unelected South Central Strategic Health Authority has completely ignored that decision. To add insult to the injury the Quango has earmarked £400,000 for wasting on legal fight while the government is short of funds, because it has given all the nation had to the bankers. Hypocrite government should be telling the Quango to behave itself or face same consequences as the enemies of democracy it is bombing in Afghanistan.

Where is the evidence of the "over whelming" majority. What is that a finger in the air job you or the Echo. . You would not be logging on to your computer if the banks throughout the world were not bailed out. . The last paragraph is somewhat nonsensicle

Lone Ranger,
I can also repeat your last line in reply, but unlike you I probably have some old type good manners and believe in respecting in others right to be original, whatever that may mean in your case. So please excuse me for not sinking to your level.
Did you not read the figures of SHA itself on what percentage of people consulted opposed adding fluoride to drinking water? It was over whelming majority. Perhaps checking facts before commenting may have helped you.
I stand by what I have said. This government is lecturing other nations on democracy but has done absolutely nothing about SHA that has ignored majority views expressed in consultation. That makes it hypocrite, which it is anyway on many other issues as well.
If you are one of the NuLabour supporters or sympathisers, what I wrote may have caused your blood pressure to rise, but there is not much I can do about it. Sorry mate that is your problem not mine.

Linesman wrote:
The experts recommend flouridation of the water. A group of agitated housewives read a couple of opinions in one of their women's magazines, and think they know best, so start a campaign. Some nutter wrote a paper blaming the MMR vaccination for all kinds of problems with children. Despite the General Medical Council denying the claim, many parents did not allow their children to have the jab, which resulted in many suffering from Mumps, Measles or Rubella. Now that 'the horse has bolted' they are wanting their children to have the MMR jab. In this instance, I accept what the experts say. I'm for flouridation.

Sorry linesman, your off side, this issue concerns those people living on the west side of the Hamble River, so 'zip your lip'.

Belshine wrote:
The fluoride added to drinking water is a by-product of the phosphate fertiliser industry - see the SHA Consultation Document where you will find this information as an insert in small print. It is totally offensive to call people who challenge decisions they think are unethical "agitated housewives". Protesters are generally well informed and have studied the evidence for themselves. The government's own systematic overview of all the research found that there were few high quality studies and that "no confident statements can be made on the efficacy or safety of water fluoridation". On this basis, the precautionary principle must apply and people are right to question "the experts" who insist on defending an unethical policy that they themselves admit can cause fluorosis in a percentage of children.

Much of what is being put forward as evidence spoils its case by shoddy speculation, hyperbole and guesswork to make an extreme case. For a start, I don't know (and neither do you) that the fluoride to be used in Hampshire's drinking water would be a "by product" of phosphate fertiliser but if it was - and thnk about this - the main product is going into your food and has been for decades. Is it synthesised within the plant? Well hardly - that's why it is introduced into the soil as a fertiliser. Secondly, you state that "No confident statements can be made.........." there lies the hand of an amateur because any professional statistician or researcher know that it is impossible to prove a negative, so somebody has been interpreting your "research" before it got to you.
Finally this stupid conspiracy theory nonsense about the who excercise being "big business" at work - why don't people who believe this do a little thinking first. "Business" can make loads more money a whole lot more quickly than spending decades bribing thousands of public officials just on the off chance that they might make a few grand selling a few tonnes of chemical to a water company. As jwillie keeps trying to tell us - if it's a by product anyway the so called main business in this conspiracy is agrochemicals. People who just swallow this (excuse pun) without thinking proves Linesman's point. People aren't to be trusted with information because that don't evaluate it - they believe every scaremongering story that comes along.

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: Our government has the cheek to lecture the world on democracy, because here at home although overwhelming majority during consultation expressed opposition to adding poisonous fluoride to our drinking water, unelected South Central Strategic Health Authority has completely ignored that decision. To add insult to the injury the Quango has earmarked £400,000 for wasting on legal fight while the government is short of funds, because it has given all the nation had to the bankers. Hypocrite government should be telling the Quango to behave itself or face same consequences as the enemies of democracy it is bombing in Afghanistan.

Where is the evidence of the "over whelming" majority. What is that a finger in the air job you or the Echo. . You would not be logging on to your computer if the banks throughout the world were not bailed out. . The last paragraph is somewhat nonsensicle

Lone Ranger,
I can also repeat your last line in reply, but unlike you I probably have some old type good manners and believe in respecting in others right to be original, whatever that may mean in your case. So please excuse me for not sinking to your level.
Did you not read the figures of SHA itself on what percentage of people consulted opposed adding fluoride to drinking water? It was over whelming majority. Perhaps checking facts before commenting may have helped you.
I stand by what I have said. This government is lecturing other nations on democracy but has done absolutely nothing about SHA that has ignored majority views expressed in consultation. That makes it hypocrite, which it is anyway on many other issues as well.
If you are one of the NuLabour supporters or sympathisers, what I wrote may have caused your blood pressure to rise, but there is not much I can do about it. Sorry mate that is your problem not mine.

At three twenty on a Saturday morning perhaps its your blood pressure thats the problem. By the way you forgot to mention about the bit on banks.Knowing how good your manners are i am sure that you will reply accordingly and not sink to my level. Mind you after reading your posts over the months and years you must be pretty close to it !!

Linesman wrote:
The experts recommend flouridation of the water.
A group of agitated housewives read a couple of opinions in one of their women's magazines, and think they know best, so start a campaign.

Some nutter wrote a paper blaming the MMR vaccination for all kinds of problems with children.
Despite the General Medical Council denying the claim, many parents did not allow their children to have the jab, which resulted in many suffering from Mumps, Measles or Rubella.
Now that 'the horse has bolted' they are wanting their children to have the MMR jab.
In this instance, I accept what the experts say.
I'm for flouridation.

I agree, adding flour to the water would be a very bad idea. But fluoride is another matter

Jenjo wrote:

Linesman wrote:
The experts recommend flouridation of the water.
A group of agitated housewives read a couple of opinions in one of their women's magazines, and think they know best, so start a campaign.

Some nutter wrote a paper blaming the MMR vaccination for all kinds of problems with children.
Despite the General Medical Council denying the claim, many parents did not allow their children to have the jab, which resulted in many suffering from Mumps, Measles or Rubella.
Now that 'the horse has bolted' they are wanting their children to have the MMR jab.
In this instance, I accept what the experts say.
I'm for flouridation.

I agree, adding flour to the water would be a very bad idea. But fluoride is another matter

Had to read it twice but that was quite funny!

Lone Ranger wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote:

Lone Ranger wrote:

Paramjit Bahia wrote: Our government has the cheek to lecture the world on democracy, because here at home although overwhelming majority during consultation expressed opposition to adding poisonous fluoride to our drinking water, unelected South Central Strategic Health Authority has completely ignored that decision. To add insult to the injury the Quango has earmarked £400,000 for wasting on legal fight while the government is short of funds, because it has given all the nation had to the bankers. Hypocrite government should be telling the Quango to behave itself or face same consequences as the enemies of democracy it is bombing in Afghanistan.

Where is the evidence of the "over whelming" majority. What is that a finger in the air job you or the Echo. . You would not be logging on to your computer if the banks throughout the world were not bailed out. . The last paragraph is somewhat nonsensicle

Lone Ranger, I can also repeat your last line in reply, but unlike you I probably have some old type good manners and believe in respecting in others right to be original, whatever that may mean in your case. So please excuse me for not sinking to your level. Did you not read the figures of SHA itself on what percentage of people consulted opposed adding fluoride to drinking water? It was over whelming majority. Perhaps checking facts before commenting may have helped you. I stand by what I have said. This government is lecturing other nations on democracy but has done absolutely nothing about SHA that has ignored majority views expressed in consultation. That makes it hypocrite, which it is anyway on many other issues as well. If you are one of the NuLabour supporters or sympathisers, what I wrote may have caused your blood pressure to rise, but there is not much I can do about it. Sorry mate that is your problem not mine.

At three twenty on a Saturday morning perhaps its your blood pressure thats the problem. By the way you forgot to mention about the bit on banks.Knowing how good your manners are i am sure that you will reply accordingly and not sink to my level. Mind you after reading your posts over the months and years you must be pretty close to it !!

My friend difference between you and me is that I may not agree with others but respect their views and right to express those. Also believe in telling the truth which often is bitter for many.
Although your contributions are often very good, on this one you did not even check your facts. You lowered your own standard. There was full page in the Echo last night clearly saying that 72% of people consulted opposed adding fluoride to the water.
Getting to your level? No comment, I don’t want to be rude to the person who I genuinely believe is reasonably intelligent, although may have some soft spot in heart for NuLabour…

Thank you PB very patronising.
.
72% of the people consulted = exactly my point. Unfortuately i did not read the Echo last night. but may i as 72& of what, 10 people, 100 people, 1000 pwople. As you know you can do whatever you like with your statistics. When you can say that the overwhelming majority of people in the stated areas are against it then that will be different.
.
So if there are say 20,000 residents in the areas concerned, who are each asked the quesetion.. and then produce the overwhelming majority then that is different. Until then you have no hard facts.

Thank you PB very patronising.
.
72% of the people consulted = exactly my point. Unfortuately i did not read the Echo last night. but may i as 72& of what, 10 people, 100 people, 1000 pwople. As you know you can do whatever you like with your statistics. When you can say that the overwhelming majority of people in the stated areas are against it then that will be different.
.
So if there are say 20,000 residents in the areas concerned, who are each asked the quesetion.. and then produce the overwhelming majority then that is different. Until then you have no hard facts.

"When historians come to write about this period, they will single out fluoridation as the single biggest mistake in public policy that we've ever had." -
Paul Connett, PhD, Biochemistry

"Water fluoridation is the single largest case of scientific fraud, promoted by the government, supported by taxpayer dollars, aided and abetted by the ADA and the AMA, in the history of the planet." -
David Kennedy, DDS, President International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology

Lone Ranger wrote:
Thank you PB very patronising. . 72% of the people consulted = exactly my point. Unfortuately i did not read the Echo last night. but may i as 72& of what, 10 people, 100 people, 1000 pwople. As you know you can do whatever you like with your statistics. When you can say that the overwhelming majority of people in the stated areas are against it then that will be different. . So if there are say 20,000 residents in the areas concerned, who are each asked the quesetion.. and then produce the overwhelming majority then that is different. Until then you have no hard facts.

Lone Ranger, please accept my assurance I have no intention to patronise someone who I genuinely think is very intelligent person.
Like in election for the council or parliament although everybody on the electoral register has right to vote; only votes that matter are of those who actually vote i.e. not abstain. When the same criteria is applied to this consultation then 72% were against adding fluoride to water. Although at the time of writing this I am not aware of how many actually responded to that consultation, but I think response was reasonably good.
I am sure even you won't dispute that 72% vote for an argument is very much higher percentage than NuLabour got in the last election. I am sure you will correct me if I am wrong, but there was also opinion taken on the phone, even then majority expressed opposition. Echo had on line poll on the subject, where even larger percentage of people supported opposition to fluoride.
As you are fully aware there are government guidelines, which suggest that consumers’ views should be taken into account before adding fluoride. So result under the laid down procedures is against the proposal. I rest my case for you to judge fairly.
Have a nice week end.
Kind regards