Fluoride RSS Feed


Hampshire's fluoride debate

Fluoride fear after chemical blunder

7:50am Thursday 21st May 2009 in


FEARS have been raised over the safety of adding fluoride to Hampshire’s water, after an accident in Australia left residents drinking supplies containing 20 times their normal maximum dose.

An error during maintenance at a water plant in Queensland caused water with much higher levels of fluoride to be pumped through people’s taps.

Click below to see a video of today's headlines in sixty seconds

The amount of fluoride drunk by residents near Brisbane was 30 times that proposed as the safe level for Southampton and the surrounding area.

Authorities insist the process of adding the chemical to the supplies of nearly 200,000 Hampshire homes, which could happen as soon as next year, will be completely failsafe.

But anti-fluoride campaigners say the incident Down Under – the first of its kind in the country – shows there are no guarantees and is another reason the contentious scheme should be scrapped.

“They always say they put in the technologies to ensure it can’t happen, but even things that supposedly can’t happen have a habit of happening,”

said chairman of Hampshire Against Fluoridation, John Spottiswoode.

“You can never be completely sure it’s going to work.

“You’re relying on technology, but there is always room for human error.

“It’s another reason to be wary of fluoridation.”

Homes in Queensland, where plans were announced earlier this year to extend fluoridation to cover all communities of more than 1,000 people, received the high doses at the start of the month.

Details of the error, which meant the fluoridation supply was not shut down along with the rest of the plant, have only just been released, prompting Premier Anna Bligh to reassure residents she believes there are no health risks.

A Southern Water spokeswoman said stringent safety checks will be put in place to ensure dosing errors cannot happen.

“Systems will be designed to be fail-safe,” she added.

Related links


Comments(20)

Pam W says...
8:15am Thu 21 May 09

But what southern water didn't say is that if something does go wrong we won't be able to take legal action against them because they will have immunity against prosecution under the 2003 Water Act. So who could we sue if we are poisoned? Who knows? Can anyone think of any other situation where someone can sell you a duff product but there's nothing you can do about it?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

johnbullas says...
8:45am Thu 21 May 09

I would expect that they CANNOT protect themselves from legal action for personal injury or death ... please check as this usually would fall under an extablished principle in Law that says, despite what the signs always say, you can!... OH.. remember Camelford where the wrong tank was used to dump water treatment chemical into? Loads of people got a big dose of aluminium in the water? ( and green perms) errors happen REGARDLESS and no one tried to stop chlorination of water after that then did they???

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

johnbullas says...
8:51am Thu 21 May 09

Just for my information, I thought flouride only worked in toothpaste when it was used on growing teeth, NB: How do the levels of daily exposure from flouridised water compare with two sessions of cleaning your teeth with flouridised toothpaste?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

stuartjebbitt says...
8:57am Thu 21 May 09

"Systems will be designed to be fail-safe"
Yeah right. Thats what the Australian water company said.
Southern water has one of the worst records as regards leaks and pollution.
In 2008, they were fined £20m million by Ofwat for 'providing deliberately misleading information'
So, why should we believe anything they say?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Pam W says...
9:02am Thu 21 May 09

The Water Act guarantees water companies an indemnity if something goes wrong - ie if they supply you with an overdose and you sue them, the government would pay the the water company's legal bill. It isn't the same as being able to take independent legal action against a company that supplies you with duff consumer goods because you can bet anything you like that the government would do everything it could to stop the legal action or get it overturned. In Australia residents haven't been able to sue the water company at all because the law doesn't allow them to

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Jenjo says...
9:10am Thu 21 May 09

In any case the terms of the indemnity haven't been established yet, so who knows what they might be? the government may try to pass a law that says no legal action can be taken at all, like they did in Oz

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Frankacne says...
9:13am Thu 21 May 09

Scores of problems have occured in the UK featuring drinking water plants as a result of which chemicals such as aluminium, caustic soda, chlorine and fluoride. many rivers have suffered and in some cases, wildlife has been exterminated. Chemicals added to the water supply often reach much higher levels in water supplies to consumers close to the source of supplies, near boreholes or reservoirs. Occasionally, catastrophes such as Camelford. According ot the BBC, cornish people suffered permanent brain damage and other died but of course there is always a "tame" expert who willsay everything is fine and people are perfectly safe. This is of course of little consolation to those whose loved ones have died prematurely. The reasons for these accidents can be varied, sometimes its leaks or power failures, other times its technological failure and most commonly its down to human error. Whatever the cause the results are usually the same. Whether in Australia or here in the UK billions of have been spent to clean up water supplies and the first rule must always be to avoid contact between the water and dangerous chemicals or dangerous lunatics like Ann Blige the Queensland premier. Fluoride is undoubtedly a very toxic and deadly chemical, almost as deadly as the incompetent and corrup madmen and women who get into politics or the quangos they support, purely for personal gain and a lack of Viagra.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Oracle1 says...
9:57am Thu 21 May 09

Too late once it happens as in Oz. We do not want it and have to stand firm.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Totton Ric says...
9:59am Thu 21 May 09

NO THANKS TO FLOURIDE!

I live in Totton & will be asking southern water to pipe me in fluoride free water to my house, anyone else who would like this??? or better still pipe fluoride water into houses that want it, I recon out of a possible 350000 homesyou might get 10-20 homes wanting this !!!!!
Has anyone done a survey asking if we want this ?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

MangaFace says...
10:07am Thu 21 May 09

Make your kids brush there teeth you pikies, then we wouldnt get this.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Swalk says...
10:29am Thu 21 May 09

In view of the Australian accident, it looks like the indemnity offered by the government to Southern Water just got very expensive. And guess what, we'll be paying for it! So the water company won't have to cough up a penny if it all goes pear shaped.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Jenjo says...
10:44am Thu 21 May 09

A indemnity can be one of several things, either against costs or against prosecution altogether (whcih seems to have been the case in Oz). Perhaps Jon Reeve could find out which they've got in mind, because the last time I asked Southern Water had no idea what the terms of it would be. If it makes any legal action impossible, it is very dodgy - how on earth did those Aussies ever allow that to happen?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Irate Wintonian says...
11:02am Thu 21 May 09

Big deal!

This could just as easily happen with the chlorine, ammonia or sulphur dioxide that is already used in the disinfection process.

Nobody fussing over that for the last 100 years that those chemicals have been used.

Fluoridation is NOT a problem.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Rob444 says...
12:45pm Thu 21 May 09

Totton Ric wrote:
NO THANKS TO FLOURIDE!

I live in Totton & will be asking southern water to pipe me in fluoride free water to my house, anyone else who would like this??? or better still pipe fluoride water into houses that want it, I recon out of a possible 350000 homesyou might get 10-20 homes wanting this !!!!!
Has anyone done a survey asking if we want this ?
The simple solution is to issue fluoride tablets to those people who want them.

The vast majority of people do not want contaminated drinking water.

If our tap water is polluted with this toxic chemical, then we can expect civil disobedience to break out. Direct action will be the only option.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Rob444 says...
12:57pm Thu 21 May 09

Irate Wintonian wrote:
Big deal!

This could just as easily happen with the chlorine, ammonia or sulphur dioxide that is already used in the disinfection process.

Nobody fussing over that for the last 100 years that those chemicals have been used.

Fluoridation is NOT a problem.
Perhaps it COULD happen with the stated substances, but the fact is that it HAS happened to the people of Camelford, with disastrous results in many cases.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Totton Ric says...
3:57pm Thu 21 May 09

Irate Wintonian wrote:
Big deal! This could just as easily happen with the chlorine, ammonia or sulphur dioxide that is already used in the disinfection process. Nobody fussing over that for the last 100 years that those chemicals have been used. Fluoridation is NOT a problem.
I take it you dont live in these area affected (Winchester).Fact is that there are very Serious side affects with adding these amounts of fluoride & I for one don’t want my children to have this amount, I make sure they clean there teeth twice a day with a decent toothpaste & as said before its really down to the parents !

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Matt Probert says...
6:21pm Thu 21 May 09

I notice our glorious councillors STILL have NOT taken action and stopped this flouridation plan, despite their constituents demanding it. Might one ask whom these councillors work for? The constituents, or industry? Can they confirm they are NOT receiving payment for allowing this undemocratic and unwelcome flouridation to take place. Gordon Brown promissed it would be OUR decision, well we decided NO but no one is stopping it. WHY NOT? A cynic might wonder who is being paid to allow this to go through.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Condor Man says...
6:47pm Thu 21 May 09

Sounds a bit like what happened in Erin Brockovich- which was a true story.

Denham and Whitehead have been too quiet on this matter (as have Smith and Moulton to that matter). Wake them up before we're all poisoned.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Totton Ric says...
6:49pm Thu 21 May 09

Matt Probert wrote:
I notice our glorious councillors STILL have NOT taken action and stopped this flouridation plan, despite their constituents demanding it. Might one ask whom these councillors work for? The constituents, or industry? Can they confirm they are NOT receiving payment for allowing this undemocratic and unwelcome flouridation to take place. Gordon Brown promissed it would be OUR decision, well we decided NO but no one is stopping it. WHY NOT? A cynic might wonder who is being paid to allow this to go through.
To busy taken bungs or fruadding this country out of millions, all the same,don’t give a sxxt

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Swalk says...
10:30pm Thu 21 May 09

My understanding of the situation is that if you suffer provable ill health you will be able to sue the water company, but because they will be indemnified by the SHA against costs, they will be covered for any compensation. However, anyone else who suffers no provable ill effects won't be able to do anything about it because fluoridation is now legal under the Water Act (2003). Southern Water are therefore immune from prosecution unless you are actually poisoned - you won't be able to take action just because there has been a mistake and others have suffered.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

More Fluoride stories


No winners yet in fluoride debate Fluoride fear after chemical blunder

Most popular







Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses