No way for health body to behave
THE South Central Strategic Health Authority is acting very much like the stroppy teenager that locks themself in the bathroom and refuses to talk, having failed to impose their will upon the rest of us.
They seriously misjudged the public mood, especially when the result of the public consultation on adding fluoride to tap water was not to their liking. They have declined to respond to many of the points made by contributors to your paper on the subject, even though these have appeared on an almost daily basis for months.
The most recent statistics on children's dental health in this area reveal that there is not the serious problem that was at first believed. Instead of re-examining the basis for the decision, they are now simply blaming the way the statistics were compiled and refusing to enter talks, pretending that they can't do so because of an outstanding judicial review.
This is no way for a professional public health body to behave. They are only acting this way because they can. Unlike, all the local authorities and MPs opposed to the proposals, they don't ever face a public vote.
CLLR DAVID HARRISON,
Leader, New Forest District Liberal Democrats
1 Dec 2009
28 Nov 2009
Daily Echo - letters
Well-researched fluoride arguments
BILL Edmunds is so right (Letters, November 24) when he says that even some people connected with Southampton PCT, exposed as they were to so much one-sided pro-fluoridation propaganda, have expressed their opposition to fluoridation.
I was until recently an employee of Southampton PCT. The pro-fluoridation policy was presented to us as incontrovertible fact.
We were fed the line that as fluoride occurred naturally anyway, all that was being proposed was a top-up.
I also heard the completely illogical assertion that adding chlorine is fine, so why not add artificial fluoride too? "Hmm", I thought. "So then why not add lots more chemicals like for example, bromide, in order to calm men down a bit, reduce the incidence of rape and limit the population?" That would be just as ridiculous.
As well as being expected to embrace the fluoridation message unquestioningly, we were asked to promote it, including writing as private individuals to the SHA during the consultation.
So, after a scientist friend told me that the science backing fluoridation was highly dubious, I decided to look into it for myself.
I was shocked at what I found. Just a top-up of the fluoride that's already there? Er, no. -It's actually hexafluorosilicic acid, an industrial waste product that it is illegal to dump in the sea, that they want to put into our drinking water.
And far from promulgating cranky pseudo-scientific rubbish, I found that anti-fluoridationists offered well-researched facts and cogent arguments.
Numerous peer-reviewed scientific and medical papers found fluoridation to be ineffective in reducing tooth decay, or possibly harmful to health or both. -Two thousand experts, worldwide, in the fields of medicine, pharmacology, toxicology and other relevant sciences counsel against fluoridation. Even scientists commissioned by the Government protest that their findings have been distorted to make fluoridation seem a lot safer than it is.
SUE ROBSON, Southampton
Fluoride concern
WATER fluoridation does not cause all fluoride poisoning cases but adds an ever increasing exposure of everyone from many sources. The one part per million (ppm) added to water does not mean that 1 ppm will be delivered to a house. In the USA when water pipes were corroded the cause was found to be up to 6.000 ppm of fluoride accumulated in sediment in pipe bends and valves. The laboratories doing the tests noted if some of this sediment was disturbed and delivered to a house it could injure anyone drinking it.
In the USA over 20,000 cases of fluoride poisoning cases are reported to poisons units every year due to fluoride poisoning from toothpaste alone which includes the odd death,
The A&E Unit at Dudley Hospital, Birmingham in a paper to the Emergency Medicine Journal in December 1993 noted that fluoride poisoning cases and causing systemic poisoning were being overlooked because the systemic effects were being overlooked and just the burns being treated.
The Israeli Medical Journal May 2008 notes poisoning from fluoride and details the systemic affects causing cardiac arrest and sudden deaths due to reduced calcium levels which are often overlooked with fluoride-penetrating the body from external exposures,
The French and most governments worldwide have stated they do fluoridate water supplies for ethical and medical considerations. The French Government also say that half of one ppm is the safe limit, half the level the UK Government say is safe. The countries with least tooth decay like Finland, Holland and others do not fluoridate their water supplies as fluoride does not help reduce tooth decay It does how ever help big industry dispose of highly toxic waste cheaply EDWARD PRIESTLEY, France.
"they do fluoridate" misprint by the Echo, should be "they do not fluoridate ."
BILL Edmunds is so right (Letters, November 24) when he says that even some people connected with Southampton PCT, exposed as they were to so much one-sided pro-fluoridation propaganda, have expressed their opposition to fluoridation.
I was until recently an employee of Southampton PCT. The pro-fluoridation policy was presented to us as incontrovertible fact.
We were fed the line that as fluoride occurred naturally anyway, all that was being proposed was a top-up.
I also heard the completely illogical assertion that adding chlorine is fine, so why not add artificial fluoride too? "Hmm", I thought. "So then why not add lots more chemicals like for example, bromide, in order to calm men down a bit, reduce the incidence of rape and limit the population?" That would be just as ridiculous.
As well as being expected to embrace the fluoridation message unquestioningly, we were asked to promote it, including writing as private individuals to the SHA during the consultation.
So, after a scientist friend told me that the science backing fluoridation was highly dubious, I decided to look into it for myself.
I was shocked at what I found. Just a top-up of the fluoride that's already there? Er, no. -It's actually hexafluorosilicic acid, an industrial waste product that it is illegal to dump in the sea, that they want to put into our drinking water.
And far from promulgating cranky pseudo-scientific rubbish, I found that anti-fluoridationists offered well-researched facts and cogent arguments.
Numerous peer-reviewed scientific and medical papers found fluoridation to be ineffective in reducing tooth decay, or possibly harmful to health or both. -Two thousand experts, worldwide, in the fields of medicine, pharmacology, toxicology and other relevant sciences counsel against fluoridation. Even scientists commissioned by the Government protest that their findings have been distorted to make fluoridation seem a lot safer than it is.
SUE ROBSON, Southampton
Fluoride concern
WATER fluoridation does not cause all fluoride poisoning cases but adds an ever increasing exposure of everyone from many sources. The one part per million (ppm) added to water does not mean that 1 ppm will be delivered to a house. In the USA when water pipes were corroded the cause was found to be up to 6.000 ppm of fluoride accumulated in sediment in pipe bends and valves. The laboratories doing the tests noted if some of this sediment was disturbed and delivered to a house it could injure anyone drinking it.
In the USA over 20,000 cases of fluoride poisoning cases are reported to poisons units every year due to fluoride poisoning from toothpaste alone which includes the odd death,
The A&E Unit at Dudley Hospital, Birmingham in a paper to the Emergency Medicine Journal in December 1993 noted that fluoride poisoning cases and causing systemic poisoning were being overlooked because the systemic effects were being overlooked and just the burns being treated.
The Israeli Medical Journal May 2008 notes poisoning from fluoride and details the systemic affects causing cardiac arrest and sudden deaths due to reduced calcium levels which are often overlooked with fluoride-penetrating the body from external exposures,
The French and most governments worldwide have stated they do fluoridate water supplies for ethical and medical considerations. The French Government also say that half of one ppm is the safe limit, half the level the UK Government say is safe. The countries with least tooth decay like Finland, Holland and others do not fluoridate their water supplies as fluoride does not help reduce tooth decay It does how ever help big industry dispose of highly toxic waste cheaply EDWARD PRIESTLEY, France.
"they do fluoridate" misprint by the Echo, should be "they do not fluoridate ."
27 Nov 2009
Bournemouth - Shock over condition of children’s teeth
Shock over condition of children’s teeth
9:30am Thursday 26th November 2009
By Joanna Codd »
LEVELS of tooth decay among older children in Bournemouth and Poole are worse than the national average, says a report.
Eleven-year-olds in Bournemouth have an average of 0.61 decayed, missing or filled permanent teeth, and Poole an average of 0.53 – both figures higher than the average for England as a whole and for the former Dorset and Somerset strategic health authority.
The report, to the NHS Bournemouth and Poole’s board meeting, says provisional figures indicate that decay levels for five-year-olds may be better than the national average.
But it adds that the most recent figures – as yet unverified – had shown that more than 26 per cent of local children had experienced tooth decay in the area, each having an average of 2.65 decayed teeth.
Among the adult population, around 37 per cent do not seek dental treatment, and are more likely to be affected by dental disease.
The report says those in deprived areas, the disabled and people in care are among those most likely to have poor oral health and access to services. It suggests that in the short-term, improvement could be achieved by using fluoride varnish and toothpaste, particularly in areas of high need.
While there would be “significant” numbers of toothless older people who would need denture care for many years, there would also be more middle-aged and elderly adults needing advanced restorative dental care.
The trust plans a number of measures to tackle inequalities, increase public awareness, and include oral health in general health improvement programmes.
9:30am Thursday 26th November 2009
By Joanna Codd »
LEVELS of tooth decay among older children in Bournemouth and Poole are worse than the national average, says a report.
Eleven-year-olds in Bournemouth have an average of 0.61 decayed, missing or filled permanent teeth, and Poole an average of 0.53 – both figures higher than the average for England as a whole and for the former Dorset and Somerset strategic health authority.
The report, to the NHS Bournemouth and Poole’s board meeting, says provisional figures indicate that decay levels for five-year-olds may be better than the national average.
But it adds that the most recent figures – as yet unverified – had shown that more than 26 per cent of local children had experienced tooth decay in the area, each having an average of 2.65 decayed teeth.
Among the adult population, around 37 per cent do not seek dental treatment, and are more likely to be affected by dental disease.
The report says those in deprived areas, the disabled and people in care are among those most likely to have poor oral health and access to services. It suggests that in the short-term, improvement could be achieved by using fluoride varnish and toothpaste, particularly in areas of high need.
While there would be “significant” numbers of toothless older people who would need denture care for many years, there would also be more middle-aged and elderly adults needing advanced restorative dental care.
The trust plans a number of measures to tackle inequalities, increase public awareness, and include oral health in general health improvement programmes.
25 Nov 2009
24 Nov 2009
Daily Echo
Wake up and look at the facts surrounding fluoride
IS AK Roberts (Letters, November 21) aware that (assuming AK is a man) his insignificant drop of fluoride can cause mottling of the teeth that dentists charge thousands of pounds to cover with veneers?
Would he like his children to suffer that because some other families do not teach their young to clean their teeth or eat sensibly? He mentions chlorine but that is there to treat the water. It too has its dangers, it's known to cause colon cancer but if you are aware of that and there is colon cancer in your family you can either buy a simple filter, let the water stand or boil it.
Fluoride is very different, is he aware that tonnes of Hexafluorosilicic acid contaminated with two per cent of toxic metals and trace amounts of radioactive isotopes are used to fluoridate water.
To correct some of his misinformation: Hartlepool Water supplies the highest fluoride level in the UK and
that is only 1.04 ppm so where the 25 ppm water is drunk without harm only AK Roberts knows. In countries with fluoride contaminated water, villagers suffer terrible crippling effects. Just do a Google search. The calcium fluoride in Southern Water is only .11 ppm not the .60 ppm he was told.
The figures are published on the Drinking Water Inspectorate's website. As for the Echo not publishing pro fluoridation letters perhaps they don't get many. Even some of the people connected with the PCT exposed to one sided propaganda have expressed their support for us. My advice to AK Roberts is to wake up and look at the facts.
BILL EDMUNDS, Hampshire Against Fluoridation, Cadnam.
IS AK Roberts (Letters, November 21) aware that (assuming AK is a man) his insignificant drop of fluoride can cause mottling of the teeth that dentists charge thousands of pounds to cover with veneers?
Would he like his children to suffer that because some other families do not teach their young to clean their teeth or eat sensibly? He mentions chlorine but that is there to treat the water. It too has its dangers, it's known to cause colon cancer but if you are aware of that and there is colon cancer in your family you can either buy a simple filter, let the water stand or boil it.
Fluoride is very different, is he aware that tonnes of Hexafluorosilicic acid contaminated with two per cent of toxic metals and trace amounts of radioactive isotopes are used to fluoridate water.
To correct some of his misinformation: Hartlepool Water supplies the highest fluoride level in the UK and
that is only 1.04 ppm so where the 25 ppm water is drunk without harm only AK Roberts knows. In countries with fluoride contaminated water, villagers suffer terrible crippling effects. Just do a Google search. The calcium fluoride in Southern Water is only .11 ppm not the .60 ppm he was told.
The figures are published on the Drinking Water Inspectorate's website. As for the Echo not publishing pro fluoridation letters perhaps they don't get many. Even some of the people connected with the PCT exposed to one sided propaganda have expressed their support for us. My advice to AK Roberts is to wake up and look at the facts.
BILL EDMUNDS, Hampshire Against Fluoridation, Cadnam.
23 Nov 2009
Daily Echo - Oystermen express fears over fluoride effluent
Oystermen express fears over fluoride effluent
CLAIMS the oyster fishing industry in the Solent could be threatened by controversial plans to add fluoride to tap water in and around Southampton will be considered by councillors today
Southampton's historic Court Leet wants Tory council leaders to examine the likely affects on shellfish of pumping tonnes of fluoride effluent into Southampton Water.
There are fears it could hit the livelihoods of local fisherman and studies have shown fluoride can stunt growth and
increase death rates. Between 60 and 80 boats are licensed to fish for oysters in the Solent. There are oyster beds off Calshot Spit, Stanswood Bay, Hamble River and Chilling near Hill Head.
Oysterman Stephen Matthews, whose plea was backed by the Court Leet, said: "It is incumbent upon the city council to take steps to determine the possible effects upon the shellfish environment which may occur due to the presence of fluoride and to take steps to halt the fluoridation
programme until the appropriate bodies have been consulted and a proper environmental assessment has been carried out." Environment chiefs at Southampton City Council have told councillors they have no power to protect marine life from harm caused by any effluent discharge into the Solent. And the Environment Agency said the fluoride dose level would be within environmental quality standards.
CLAIMS the oyster fishing industry in the Solent could be threatened by controversial plans to add fluoride to tap water in and around Southampton will be considered by councillors today
Southampton's historic Court Leet wants Tory council leaders to examine the likely affects on shellfish of pumping tonnes of fluoride effluent into Southampton Water.
There are fears it could hit the livelihoods of local fisherman and studies have shown fluoride can stunt growth and
increase death rates. Between 60 and 80 boats are licensed to fish for oysters in the Solent. There are oyster beds off Calshot Spit, Stanswood Bay, Hamble River and Chilling near Hill Head.
Oysterman Stephen Matthews, whose plea was backed by the Court Leet, said: "It is incumbent upon the city council to take steps to determine the possible effects upon the shellfish environment which may occur due to the presence of fluoride and to take steps to halt the fluoridation
programme until the appropriate bodies have been consulted and a proper environmental assessment has been carried out." Environment chiefs at Southampton City Council have told councillors they have no power to protect marine life from harm caused by any effluent discharge into the Solent. And the Environment Agency said the fluoride dose level would be within environmental quality standards.
21 Nov 2009
Daily Echo letter
Calm down! All this fury over a tiny drop
CALM down! I can't believe the Echo's latest banner coverage of the fluoride 'debate.
All this fury lasting months over a teaspoonful of fluoride in every five tonnes of water.
We've had chlorine products in the water for many decades to prevent disease - how about optimising the fluoride level to reduce dental disease? Many authorities carry this out safely after expert analysis. Do they do this just to annoy anti-fluoride zealots? Some areas have natural levels 25 times that proposed for Southampton with no problems.
Also, let's drop this mass medication slur; medicine is taken to cure illness. As for a debate, lauded by the Echo, I would assume this involves a balanced discussion of two opposing views. The Echo doesn't publish many supporting fluoride (I only remember two). Despite this, the only random survey gave a 32 for, 38 against result, which is hardly a basis for rioting in the streets. Of the letters against, the most bizarre must be one querying if wild birds will be harmed by drinking fluoridated water. In Romsey, we won't benefit from fluoridation, but I'm told we're already at
0.6ppm so there's little to be gained.
AK ROBERTS,
Romsey.
If AK Roberts has been following the great fluoride debate he seems ill informed.
CALM down! I can't believe the Echo's latest banner coverage of the fluoride 'debate.
All this fury lasting months over a teaspoonful of fluoride in every five tonnes of water.
We've had chlorine products in the water for many decades to prevent disease - how about optimising the fluoride level to reduce dental disease? Many authorities carry this out safely after expert analysis. Do they do this just to annoy anti-fluoride zealots? Some areas have natural levels 25 times that proposed for Southampton with no problems.
Also, let's drop this mass medication slur; medicine is taken to cure illness. As for a debate, lauded by the Echo, I would assume this involves a balanced discussion of two opposing views. The Echo doesn't publish many supporting fluoride (I only remember two). Despite this, the only random survey gave a 32 for, 38 against result, which is hardly a basis for rioting in the streets. Of the letters against, the most bizarre must be one querying if wild birds will be harmed by drinking fluoridated water. In Romsey, we won't benefit from fluoridation, but I'm told we're already at
0.6ppm so there's little to be gained.
AK ROBERTS,
Romsey.
If AK Roberts has been following the great fluoride debate he seems ill informed.
19 Nov 2009
Daily Echo letter
Disappointing comments
I WAS disappointed at Andrew Mortimore's comments about the recently published survey figures relating to the health of children's teeth and the proposed fluoridation of tap water (Daily Echo, October 29).
That is the third occasion in which he has tried to brush aside the results of a survey, the other two being the Echo phone poll, and the other being the self completion survey as part of the consultation.
In fact when near the time of the phone survey, a survey organised by the primary care trust produced a result indicating that if anything people were in favour of fluoridation.
At the time I wondered how the survey could have been worded to produce such a result.
1 raised my concerns that following the previous results, any survey could be manipulated to produce a result in favour of fluoridation.
My concerns were raised again when the PCT supplied their reply postcards with first class postage paid. However despite this, and the way the consultation was conducted 72 per cent of those who replied to the survey voted against fluoridation. However this kind of result should surely indicate to those in favour that there is still a lot of work to be done to convince people that fluoridation is a good thing, yet the talk from the Strategic Health Authority is that they have gone above their obligations. I would therefore dispute whether Dr Mapstone's original reassurance has proved justified.
MALCOLM CLARKE, Eastleigh.
I WAS disappointed at Andrew Mortimore's comments about the recently published survey figures relating to the health of children's teeth and the proposed fluoridation of tap water (Daily Echo, October 29).
That is the third occasion in which he has tried to brush aside the results of a survey, the other two being the Echo phone poll, and the other being the self completion survey as part of the consultation.
In fact when near the time of the phone survey, a survey organised by the primary care trust produced a result indicating that if anything people were in favour of fluoridation.
At the time I wondered how the survey could have been worded to produce such a result.
1 raised my concerns that following the previous results, any survey could be manipulated to produce a result in favour of fluoridation.
My concerns were raised again when the PCT supplied their reply postcards with first class postage paid. However despite this, and the way the consultation was conducted 72 per cent of those who replied to the survey voted against fluoridation. However this kind of result should surely indicate to those in favour that there is still a lot of work to be done to convince people that fluoridation is a good thing, yet the talk from the Strategic Health Authority is that they have gone above their obligations. I would therefore dispute whether Dr Mapstone's original reassurance has proved justified.
MALCOLM CLARKE, Eastleigh.
18 Nov 2009
Fluoridated Australia - Casey alarm at toddlers’ teeth
Casey alarm at toddlers’ teeth
News18 Nov 09 @ 02:15am by Dimity Barber
Dentist Desmond Yiu says he is finding a surprisingly high number of cavities in children's teeth. JANE OLLERENSHAW.
LESS than 11 per cent of Casey children have seen a dentist by their third birthday.
Child Dental Health Surveys have identified a worrying rise in decayed, missing or filled teeth in the area’s four-year-olds since 1998.
Now Casey-Cardinia dentists are urging parents to take toddlers’ dental health more seriously, warning decay in baby teeth can lead to problems later on.
Fountain Gate Dental Care surgeon Desmond Yiu said he had recently filled cavities in children as young as three.
“I’m finding a lot more tooth decay in children than I would expect, particularly given how readily available fluoride is in water and toothpaste,” Dr Yiu said.
“There is definitely an attitude out there that because they are just “baby teeth” there’s no need to worry. But that is a very distressing attitude. Parents need to understand that decay in a child’s first set of teeth can lead to problems in their permanent ones.”
Dr Yiu said poor diet was the cause of the concerning trend.
“There has been a cultural change towards high sugar drinks that are very damaging to teeth,” he said.
Dr Yiu said parents should book their children in for their first dental appointment at 12-24 months of age.
News18 Nov 09 @ 02:15am by Dimity Barber
Dentist Desmond Yiu says he is finding a surprisingly high number of cavities in children's teeth. JANE OLLERENSHAW.
LESS than 11 per cent of Casey children have seen a dentist by their third birthday.
Child Dental Health Surveys have identified a worrying rise in decayed, missing or filled teeth in the area’s four-year-olds since 1998.
Now Casey-Cardinia dentists are urging parents to take toddlers’ dental health more seriously, warning decay in baby teeth can lead to problems later on.
Fountain Gate Dental Care surgeon Desmond Yiu said he had recently filled cavities in children as young as three.
“I’m finding a lot more tooth decay in children than I would expect, particularly given how readily available fluoride is in water and toothpaste,” Dr Yiu said.
“There is definitely an attitude out there that because they are just “baby teeth” there’s no need to worry. But that is a very distressing attitude. Parents need to understand that decay in a child’s first set of teeth can lead to problems in their permanent ones.”
Dr Yiu said poor diet was the cause of the concerning trend.
“There has been a cultural change towards high sugar drinks that are very damaging to teeth,” he said.
Dr Yiu said parents should book their children in for their first dental appointment at 12-24 months of age.
16 Nov 2009
Daily Echo - letter
The science of spinning the Government's line
Whether or not one agrees with Dr David Mutt's personal, but informed professional, opinion as to the classification status of Cannabis, it would not be the first time that an accredited expert, seconded to Government, has run foul of the "authorised version" of political policy.
One of the best Labour environment ministers we ever had - Michael Meacher, who's views on nuclear energy and a handful of other issues, diverged from those held by Tony Blair - got the "bunch-of-fives" treatment from his leader. Blair phoned him at 3am saying "Sorry Michael, I'm letting you go."
The team of leading health scientists concluding their long deliberations at the NHS Centre for Reviews and Disseminations at York University in 1999/2000 gave a five point statement to Government which said:
1 Fluoride could not be said to be safe
2 Fluoridation would be unlikely to correct dental health inequalities.
3 Dental fluorosis could not be categorized
merely as a cosmetic condition
4 Lack of good quality studies made results inconclusive
5 More research of a higher standard, free from bias, should be conducted.
The Government's own media release said precisely the opposite on every point.
No prizes offered for guessing whose version was adopted as the "official" line
Who was the health minister in charge at that time? . . . none other than Alan Johnson.
BERNARD J SEWARD, Bristol.
Whether or not one agrees with Dr David Mutt's personal, but informed professional, opinion as to the classification status of Cannabis, it would not be the first time that an accredited expert, seconded to Government, has run foul of the "authorised version" of political policy.
One of the best Labour environment ministers we ever had - Michael Meacher, who's views on nuclear energy and a handful of other issues, diverged from those held by Tony Blair - got the "bunch-of-fives" treatment from his leader. Blair phoned him at 3am saying "Sorry Michael, I'm letting you go."
The team of leading health scientists concluding their long deliberations at the NHS Centre for Reviews and Disseminations at York University in 1999/2000 gave a five point statement to Government which said:
1 Fluoride could not be said to be safe
2 Fluoridation would be unlikely to correct dental health inequalities.
3 Dental fluorosis could not be categorized
merely as a cosmetic condition
4 Lack of good quality studies made results inconclusive
5 More research of a higher standard, free from bias, should be conducted.
The Government's own media release said precisely the opposite on every point.
No prizes offered for guessing whose version was adopted as the "official" line
Who was the health minister in charge at that time? . . . none other than Alan Johnson.
BERNARD J SEWARD, Bristol.
14 Nov 2009
The governmental Orwellian answer to the human rights challenge
Moreover, we consider that fluoridation is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights because new schemes could not be introduced before there has been a public consultation in the area that would be affected.
How could anybody write that after the debacle of Southampton's consultation where the people of Southampton demonstrated that they don't want fluoridation and the SHA completely ignore it - a politician?
How could anybody write that after the debacle of Southampton's consultation where the people of Southampton demonstrated that they don't want fluoridation and the SHA completely ignore it - a politician?
13 Nov 2009
Lymington Times letter
SIR, — Regarding fluoridation and the 'A&T' story revealing improved dental statistics relating to Southampton flve-year-olds:
The most recent survey suggested that the teeth of the city's children now have average levels of decay, and not much worse than average — h.s previously claimed by the NHS.
The .strategic health authority (SHA) said comparing this year's statistics with previous data would give the false impression of an improvement in dental health because the new research was done • differently.
There are two problems with this response. First, an analysis of the statistics shows that the teeth of those who were omitted from the survey would have had to be really bad to have increased the Southampton decay rate to the level of earlier surveys.
Secondly, the same revised means of research indicated that the dental health of (unfluoridated) Southampton five-year-olds was now considerably better than those who live in (fluoridated) central Birmingham. How does the SHA explain that?
Jason Merrit
Glenwood Avenue,
Bassett.
The most recent survey suggested that the teeth of the city's children now have average levels of decay, and not much worse than average — h.s previously claimed by the NHS.
The .strategic health authority (SHA) said comparing this year's statistics with previous data would give the false impression of an improvement in dental health because the new research was done • differently.
There are two problems with this response. First, an analysis of the statistics shows that the teeth of those who were omitted from the survey would have had to be really bad to have increased the Southampton decay rate to the level of earlier surveys.
Secondly, the same revised means of research indicated that the dental health of (unfluoridated) Southampton five-year-olds was now considerably better than those who live in (fluoridated) central Birmingham. How does the SHA explain that?
Jason Merrit
Glenwood Avenue,
Bassett.
12 Nov 2009
Daily Echo - Reverse decision to prove integrity
Reverse decision to prove integrity
OFFICIAL statistics now prove that the Strategic Health Authority's (SHA's) justification for fluoridation in Southampton is baseless.
So not only is the policy unethical, undemocratic and unsafe, but we now learn it was never needed in the first place.
This was just what Hampshire Against Fluoride (HAF) experts told the SHA long before they made their decision - and they were given the data proving it.
Yet despite everything, they stubbornly determined to force
fluoridation through.
There is no logical explanation for their behaviour, and it is this that prompts accusations of submitting to pressure for personal advancement, of extreme dereliction of duty, and of public betrayal.
They only have themselves to blame - and all they have to do to prove their integrity is reverse their decision.
Public opinion and virtually every local elected authority, opposes fluoridation, but they have all been overpowered by
this unelected quango.
This is dictatorship - a word not used lightly or rhetorically, but as absolute, irrefutable fact.
If they continue to ignore the voice of the people, the demand that board members face a jury, will become overwhelming.
The Judicial Review will make a judgement on the process.
The people who abused the process should also be examined, lest this abuse be repeated nationwide.
JENNIFER GODSCHALL JOHNSON (HAF member)
OFFICIAL statistics now prove that the Strategic Health Authority's (SHA's) justification for fluoridation in Southampton is baseless.
So not only is the policy unethical, undemocratic and unsafe, but we now learn it was never needed in the first place.
This was just what Hampshire Against Fluoride (HAF) experts told the SHA long before they made their decision - and they were given the data proving it.
Yet despite everything, they stubbornly determined to force
fluoridation through.
There is no logical explanation for their behaviour, and it is this that prompts accusations of submitting to pressure for personal advancement, of extreme dereliction of duty, and of public betrayal.
They only have themselves to blame - and all they have to do to prove their integrity is reverse their decision.
Public opinion and virtually every local elected authority, opposes fluoridation, but they have all been overpowered by
this unelected quango.
This is dictatorship - a word not used lightly or rhetorically, but as absolute, irrefutable fact.
If they continue to ignore the voice of the people, the demand that board members face a jury, will become overwhelming.
The Judicial Review will make a judgement on the process.
The people who abused the process should also be examined, lest this abuse be repeated nationwide.
JENNIFER GODSCHALL JOHNSON (HAF member)
11 Nov 2009
Daily Echo - Don't sacrifice our democratic freedom
Don't sacrifice our democratic freedom
HOW right was the correspondent who wrote regarding fluoride in our water.
We have said, absolutely, positively and definitely, we do not wish to be guinea pigs for this experiment. What doesn't the SHA understand? Plain English?
Armistice Day will (I hope) cause them to remember with all due, the millions of lives sacrificed in two wars and the cream of today's young men who gave their lives in the precious name of
democracy and give thanks they enjoy this freedom.
I very much object (having done my bit) to being told at my age what I need for my health, having a good doctor, and dentist who has been doing this quite happily for years.
How dare a handful of people who were not even there, throw up the sacrifices of so many heroes J away on a whim! Step down now with grace. J BAILEY, Southampton.
HOW right was the correspondent who wrote regarding fluoride in our water.
We have said, absolutely, positively and definitely, we do not wish to be guinea pigs for this experiment. What doesn't the SHA understand? Plain English?
Armistice Day will (I hope) cause them to remember with all due, the millions of lives sacrificed in two wars and the cream of today's young men who gave their lives in the precious name of
democracy and give thanks they enjoy this freedom.
I very much object (having done my bit) to being told at my age what I need for my health, having a good doctor, and dentist who has been doing this quite happily for years.
How dare a handful of people who were not even there, throw up the sacrifices of so many heroes J away on a whim! Step down now with grace. J BAILEY, Southampton.
10 Nov 2009
7 Nov 2009
Nine out of ten children have cavities
Nine out of ten children have cavities who were examined in a Green Bay Wisconsin school which is fluoridated.NYSCOF
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
