Fluoride in tap water

tbs624

Thanks for posting - an appalling decision IMO, especially when elsewhere around the world areas that have once had water fluoridation schemes have ceased the practice and others have never undertaken it.

The consultation process in Hampshire was a sham, with a well-funded pro-lobby, but then the Government have made it clear that they are pro- water fluoridation. It's a cheap fix attempt to solve the problems of poorly funded dental care provision under the NHS and government inaction on the real causes of tooth decay.

The local papers say however that fluoridation in the area is unlikely to take place before 2010.

Before you make plans on bottled water you may want to have a look at this on filters. No moneysaving if you want to limit your intake of fluoride - you get to pay your usual water bills for the public water supply with added fluorosilicic acid & then you have the extra costs of filters/bottled water. If you have specific health issues it's not only your pocket that is likely to suffer, and environmentally there will be a further price to pay.

Have you also seen the previous water fluoridation thread on this board? - it's here

ceridwen

Oh - wonderful:cool: NOT!!!:mad:

I'll look forward to mottled teeth then shall I? - and what else was it that fluoride causes - remind me?

You'd have thought they'd have found some other way of getting rid of this stuff by now than chucking it in our water and trying to convince us that its "A GOOD THING" - huh!:rolleyes:

Pssst

The English are too apathetic and compliant and deserve all they get.

Mrembo

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/957372.stm

tr3mor

ceridwen wrote: »

Oh - wonderful:cool: NOT!!!:mad:

I'll look forward to mottled teeth then shall I? - and what else was it that fluoride causes - remind me?

You'd have thought they'd have found some other way of getting rid of this stuff by now than chucking it in our water and trying to convince us that its "A GOOD THING" - huh!:rolleyes:

And don't get me started on the DHMO scandal!

http://www.dhmo.org/

:mad::mad::mad:

lilibeth

tbs624 wrote: »

Thanks for posting - an appalling decision IMO, especially when elsewhere around the world areas that have once had water fluoridation schemes have ceased the practice and others have never undertaken it.

The consultation process in Hampshire was a sham, with a well-funded pro-lobby, but then the Government have made it clear that they are pro- water fluoridation. It's a cheap fix attempt to solve the problems of poorly funded dental care provision under the NHS and government inaction on the real causes of tooth decay.

The local papers say however that fluoridation in the area is unlikely to take place before 2010.

Before you make plans on bottled water you may want to have a look at this on filters. No moneysaving if you want to limit your intake of fluoride - you get to pay your usual water bills for the public water supply with added fluorosilicic acid & then you have the extra costs of filters/bottled water. If you have specific health issues it's not only your pocket that is likely to suffer, and environmentally there will be a further price to pay.

Have you also seen the previous water fluoridation thread on this board? - it's here

Thanks for those links that is brilliant I'll give it a look. I did do a search for fluoride removal last night as I was already aware that ordinary filters couldn't do it but came up with nada. So that link is extremely useful.

tbs624

Mrembo wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/957372.stm

This one refers to the York Review & is old news: you can see here the comments made by Prof Trevor Sheldon about the way in which the results of that review were misrepresented. His summary includes this statement :

"The review did not show water fluoridation to be safe."

and

“The quality of the research was too poor to establish with confidence whether or not there are potentially important adverse effects in addition to the high levels of fluorosis."

and

“Until high quality studies are undertaken providing more definite evidence, there will continue to be legitimate scientific controversy over the likely effects and costs of water fluoridation."

Further info available in original water fluoridation thread

Penelope_Penguin

tr3mor wrote: »

And don't get me started on the DHMO scandal!

http://www.dhmo.org/

:mad::mad::mad:

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: Why have I never seen that link

Just asking as I had no idea there was such antipathy towards fluoridation, do those who object to fluoride in water use fluoride toothpaste

I'll add this to the exisiting thread.

taxi97w

I was brought up in Australia where they added flouride to the water. Reason being, if I remember rightly, was to promote stronger healthier teeth. No-one seemed bothered about it, and I must say, now that I'm around the 50 year old mark, have no cavities and have never needed any dental work. In fact, (hangs head in shame but shouldn't) have only been to the dentist on a few occassions to have my teeth cleaned, when it was free as I was on unemployment benefits.
:j

lilibeth

taxi97w wrote: »

I was brought up in Australia where they added flouride to the water. Reason being, if I remember rightly, was to promote stronger healthier teeth. No-one seemed bothered about it, and I must say, now that I'm around the 50 year old mark, have no cavities and have never needed any dental work. In fact, (hangs head in shame but shouldn't) have only been to the dentist on a few occassions to have my teeth cleaned, when it was free as I was on unemployment benefits.
:j

Fluoridation in Australia is not uniform some places do it and some don't.
I suggest people look at this open letter to the Queensland Government on the subject before they think it is all rosy over there.

An OPEN LETTER to all Queensland Councillors and to State Government Members, from a professional group representing over 1500 Australian doctors, dentists and scientists against water fluoridation and personally supported by eminent international scientists as well as others working in the interests of public health, was released today.

http://ccpurewater.org/Professionals%20Against%20Water%20Fluoridation.html

And another thing let us be clear dentists are NOT qualified to make judgements on the effect of toxins in the body. They are NOT doctors the law was changed a few years ago to formally allow them to use 'Dr' as a courtesy title. Much like someone with a phd. They are qualified to talk about teeth however.

Another interesting letter this is from New Zealand. The former Principal Dental Officer of Auckland who went from being Wellingtons official expert on the subject of fluoridation and conducted a world tour promoting it at their behest. He now is AGAINST it being added to tap water

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]WHY I CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT WATER FLUORIDATION
[/FONT]John Colquhoun
I was so articulate and successful in my support of water fluoridation that my public service superiors in our capital city, Wellington, approached me and asked me to make fluoridation the subject of a world study tour in 1980 — after which I would become their expert on fluoridation and lead a campaign to promote fluoridation in those parts of New Zealand which had resisted having fluoride put into their drinking water.
Before I left on the tour my superiors confided to me that they were worried about some new evidence which had become available: information they had collected on the amount of treatment children were receiving in our school dental clinics seemed to show that tooth decay was declining just as much in places in New Zealand where fluoride had not been added to the water supply.

To explain how I came to change my opinion about water fluoridation, I must go back to when I was an ardent advocate of the procedure. I now realize that I had learned, in my training in dentistry, only one side of the scientific controversy over fluoridation. I had been taught, and believed, that there was really no scientific case against fluoridation, and that only misinformed lay people and a few crackpot professionals were foolish enough to oppose it.

http://www.fluoride-journal.com/98-31-2/312103.htm