Southampton councillors due to vote on fluoride

10:04am Wednesday 14th September 2011 in Fluoride

Councillors due to vote on fluoride Councillors due to vote on fluoride

Southampton councillors were today due to vote on calls for them to show their opposition to controversial plans to fluoridate the city’s water supplies.

Opponents of the scheme have forced a motion on to the agenda for today’s full meeting of Southampton City Council, urging the authority to completely withdraw its backing for fluoridation, through a 6,000-signature petition.

Ahead of the vote, Hampshire Against Fluoridation has sent an open letter to all 48 elected officials urging them to vote to say they do not believe adding the chemical to tap water is right for the city.

Under the Government’s proposed NHS reforms, councils are due to be handed powers over fluoridation schemes when strategic health authorities (SHA) are scrapped in 2013.

South Central SHA is working with Southern Water to determine how fluoride will be added, after defeating a High Court legal challenge.

During public consultation in 2008, the city council backed the fluoride plans, to affect nearly 200,000 people in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams.

But city councillors have subsequently voted to say there should be a referendum.

Related links

Comments(14)

hello121 says...
10:07am Wed 14 Sep 11

This is one time for those in positions of power to listen to the people who vote for them (they've already been told once, but aren't listening).

NO to fluoride and NO to mass medication for the lazy and feckless in society.

Report this post »

Nutstrangler says...
10:16am Wed 14 Sep 11

All very well, but even if Southampton Council does vote against the addition of fluoride to the water supply, what effect will this have on South Central SHA ?

Report this post »

Linesman says...
10:17am Wed 14 Sep 11

Who do they listen to for advice?

Do they listen to the experts in that field of science, or do they listen to the general public, the vast majority of whom know precious little about the subject.

Many parents acted on mis-information about the MMR injection for their children, despite assurances for the General Medical Council, and many of their children suffered long-term damage as a result.

I hope the the Councillors listen to the experts and not the self-appointed experts who remind me of the old saying, 'A little knowledge is dangerous.'

Report this post »

Polygonia says...
10:50am Wed 14 Sep 11

We already know that three quarters of the citizens do not want fluoride, how difficult is that to understand ?

Report this post »

On the inside says...
11:39am Wed 14 Sep 11

We do not know 75% object at all. we know that a very small percentage of the population took part in a survey. Just because the ones who shouted loudest continue to shout, that does not mean they are right.

Flouride is a safe, tested, and proven way to reduce tooth decay. Just because a few conspiracy theorists do not believe this that should not sway the council from doing the right thing and having the common sense to vote for the project to go ahead.

Report this post »

SpittingMoreFire says...
11:56am Wed 14 Sep 11

I'm only disappointed that a more proactive campaign to get the city's kids looking after their teeth was not taken up in conjunction with this objection. Then there could have been less cause to implement this alternative solution.

Think Big Society.

Report this post »

hello121 says...
12:14pm Wed 14 Sep 11

Fluoride toothpaste contains warnings, do not eat. I do not want all that I eat and drink contaminated with a toxic substance. Thank you.

I'm quite capable of spending £2 on a tube of fluoride paste and a brush to clean my teeth, and SPIT away fluoride.

But, I do object vociferously and in the strongest terms possible to being medicated because others are lazy and cannot look after their own oral health.

Agree with the other person about a pity Southampton SHA did not take the opportunity to promote oral health in the community, or to provide more NHS dental practices.

I do not want fluorosis or an increased risk of bone cancers THANK YOU.

NO to fluoride in my water.

Report this post »

The Rising Phoenix says...
12:39pm Wed 14 Sep 11

Its simple councillors, we the people, do not want flouride in the water supply.

Its a very simple word just two letters N and O

The people dont want it and the publics faith in you will be totally destroyed if you do not heed their words!

If chav families cant take care of their children do something about it, dont punish all of us with mass medication!

Report this post »

userds5050 says...
2:04pm Wed 14 Sep 11

On the inside wrote:
We do not know 75% object at all. we know that a very small percentage of the population took part in a survey. Just because the ones who shouted loudest continue to shout, that does not mean they are right.

Flouride is a safe, tested, and proven way to reduce tooth decay. Just because a few conspiracy theorists do not believe this that should not sway the council from doing the right thing and having the common sense to vote for the project to go ahead.
You're in favour of fluoride in the water and you can't even spell the word. Says it all really.

Report this post »

soobear says...
3:02pm Wed 14 Sep 11

hello121 wrote:
Fluoride toothpaste contains warnings, do not eat. I do not want all that I eat and drink contaminated with a toxic substance. Thank you. I'm quite capable of spending £2 on a tube of fluoride paste and a brush to clean my teeth, and SPIT away fluoride. But, I do object vociferously and in the strongest terms possible to being medicated because others are lazy and cannot look after their own oral health. Agree with the other person about a pity Southampton SHA did not take the opportunity to promote oral health in the community, or to provide more NHS dental practices. I do not want fluorosis or an increased risk of bone cancers THANK YOU. NO to fluoride in my water.
I agree wholeheartedly with this well worded post by hello121.

I disagree wholeheartedly with the post by 'ontheinside'. One does not need to be a conspiracy theorist to know that fluoride is a dangerous & toxic substance, one only needs to do a little research.

Report this post »

Huffter says...
3:31pm Wed 14 Sep 11

Water should be water; toothpaste should be toothpaste - why combine the two? Let the user decide - whatever happened to the old adage that "the customer is always right"? My toilet certainly won't benefit from being flushed with fluoridated water!

Report this post »

Bagamn says...
4:04pm Wed 14 Sep 11

Everyone assumes that everyone drinks glasses of water each day. They have not said in their blurb if it will affect the taste of a cuppa. I do not drink glasses of water, but I like my cups of tea and coffee. If the taste is altered, I will be very annoyed as I don't pay good money for good tea to be ruined by some unelected bunch that don't realise that fluoride comes from atomic reactors as a by-product. If I am to pay for water, I don't want an adulterated product forced on us by someone that doesn't have the right qualifications in the meddical area.

Report this post »

jwillie6 says...
4:21pm Wed 14 Sep 11

Isn't it strange, doctors cannot force one person to take a drug, yet the government wants to force everyone to be drugged with fluoride, a prescription drug, against their will and with no medical supervision, no control over how much you consume and no treatment for side effects.

Report this post »

magisterfaust says...
12:02pm Sun 25 Sep 11

On the inside wrote:
We do not know 75% object at all. we know that a very small percentage of the population took part in a survey. Just because the ones who shouted loudest continue to shout, that does not mean they are right. Flouride is a safe, tested, and proven way to reduce tooth decay. Just because a few conspiracy theorists do not believe this that should not sway the council from doing the right thing and having the common sense to vote for the project to go ahead.
Flouride is safe? is that safe like the vaccines that were safe. Did you hear the joke about the doctor who formulated the vaccines, but his own daughter wouldnt vaccinate her own children. Is it safe in the same way when the agriculture minister was so sure our beef was safe he stuffed a burger into his daughters mouth rather than his own.

Surely folks, the answer is to just not pay our water rates or bills. Why should you pay for something you dont want?

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree