Fluoride
Information on Drinking and Tap Water
Fluoride
and Drinking Water
Did
you know that fluoridation chemicals were once used as
pesticides?
That they are registered as poisons under the 1972 Poisons
Act, in the same group of toxins as arsenic, mercury and
paraquat?
That
there is considerable evidence that it does not reduce
levels of tooth decay.
Although
fluoride is scientifically classed as more toxic than
lead, the Government allows 20 times as much fluoride
as lead in drinking water.
The
fluoride added to drinking water isn’t the pharmaceutical
grade stuff added to toothpaste.
It’s
hexafluorosilicic acid derived from an industrial process...
It comes from the pollution scrubber liquor from factory
chimneys Basically it's a hazardous industrial waste
that is illegal to dump at sea.
It
also contains small amounts of impurities such as lead,
mercury, beryllium and
arsenic.
Read
More...
The
following article sums up the reasons why some peple are
suspicious of fluoride in our water
Fluoride
goes down like a lead balloon
Tony
Blair wants to fluoridate Britain because this will help
children’s teeth. Emily McIvor maintains that fluoridation
is
really all about ideology
WATER fluoridation is a subject that prompts strong emotions
on
both sides of the argument.
For
those opposed to it, fluoridation is an attack on civil
liberties and on the right to choose whether we use a
controversial chemical which has been linked to a range
of
medical problems including cancer, irritable bowel syndrome
and
thyroid trouble.
Fluoridation
is an attack on the basic medical ethic, enshrined
in the European Human Rights Convention, that patients
must have
the right to refuse or discontinue medication.
However,
we are being continually guilt-tripped about the
suffering supposedly caused to young people by opposition
to
fluoridation.
It’s
the conventional wisdom that fluoridation reduces tooth
decay in children.
Yet
there is considerable evidence that it does not reduce
levels
of decayed, missing and filled teeth or even the “dental
health
inequalities” that form such a large part of the
Labour, Tory and
Liberal Democrat argument in favour of fluoridation.
There
is considerable evidence from the United States –
the home
of water fluoridation – that challenges the conventional
wisdom
about fluoridation and teeth.
According
to the National Maternal and Child Oral Health Resource
Centre, the US is in a state of dental crisis.
More
than half of all children aged 6-8 and two-thirds of all
15-year-olds experience dental decay.
British
politicians say we should follow America’s lead and
fluoridate, because America has the best teeth in the
world.
Clearly,
it’s not that simple.
In
fact, most European countries have either refused to embark
on
fluoridation – like France, which rejected it on
the advice of
the Pasteur Institute – or have banned it like the
Netherlands,
which has observed fluoridation’s effects for 23
years.
We
don’t even have to cross the English Channel or the
Irish Sea
to challenge the idea that water fluoridation reduces
tooth
decay.
The
conclusion of the York Review, the Government’s own
study of
water fluoridation, which reported in 2000, found “little
evidence” that fluoridation reduced dental health
inequalities.
Pro-fluoridation
professionals seek to give the impression that
scientists generally agree with them.
This
is the case with the British Dental Association and the
British Medical Association, but elsewhere fluoride is
not seen
as “safe and effective”.
Robert
Carton, former president of the Union of Government
Scientists at the US Environmental Protection Agency –
the body
that oversees drinking water quality in the US –
has described
fluoridation as “the greatest case of scientific
fraud of this
century, if not of all time.”
In
1998, Dr Peter Mansfield examined people in the fluoridated
West Midlands and carried out fluoride-level tests on
more than
200 volunteers.
He
found that 60 per cent of them were ingesting more fluoride
than the Government considers safe.
Some
of them had four times the “safe” level in their
bodies.
Mansfield
sent his results to the highest levels at the
Department of Health, but he was ignored.
This
is especially alarming in view of the amount of fluoride
that is officially considered safe.
Although
fluoride is scientifically classed as more toxic than
lead, the Government allows 20 times as much fluoride
as lead in
drinking water.
Meanwhile,
while few people seem to know, most would be horrified
to learn that the fluoride added to drinking water isn’t
the
pharmaceutical grade stuff added to toothpaste.
It’s
hexafluorosilicic acid derived from an industrial process;
namely, the manufacture of phosphate fertiliser.
It
comes from the pollution scrubber liquor from the factory
chimneys of that industry and is simply re-labelled a
“recovered
product”.
The
fluoride that the Prime Minister wants to put in everyone’s
drinking water is a hazardous industrial waste that is
illegal to
dump at sea.
This
toxic waste doesn’t just contain fluoride. It also
has small
amounts of impurities such as lead, mercury, beryllium
and
arsenic.
One
may wonder how it ever managed to pass any safety test.
The
simple – if unbelievable – answer is that it
didn’t. In
Britain, the National
Pure Water Association has repeatedly
challenged the Government to produce the safety testing
data for
the product.
The
Government never has, because the data doesn’t exist.
It
is a wonder that any part of the medical profession could
be
in favour of fluoridation, in breach of both the European
Convention on Human Rights and Medicine and standard medical
practice.
When
Manchester City Council was about to begin putting fluoride
in school milk in July 2000, the local Green Party sought
reassurances that parents would be given comprehensive
information and encouraged to make their own choice about
it.
The
council’s senior dental health officer told the Greens
that
the information would be properly balanced.
But
when asked how this was compatible with the policy of
positive marketing of the product, he would not acknowledge
any
contradiction.
Tony
Blair should note that many countries have tried
fluoridation and stopped it. Only five still fluoridate
to any
great extent.
In
Ireland, Europe’s most heavily-fluoridated country,
there are
growing protests in favour of stopping fluoridation.
There
is a similar movement in the US.
Britain
is going backwards because an old, conventional wisdom
persists in the face of all the evidence about the lack
of
effectiveness of fluoridation, the health dangers, the
attack on
civil liberties and the breach of medical ethics.
Fluoridation
is not really about children’s teeth. It’s
about ideology.
If
the debate were really about teeth, the conclusion would
be
obvious and uncontroversial.
Tooth
decay is caused by poor diet and inadequate oral hygiene.
Fluoridation
merely medicates everyone on the debatable grounds
that this will help some of them to have better teeth,
while a
blind eye is turned to the potential adverse effects on
other
aspects of health.
Education
is the key to protecting teeth.
Fluoridation
is a neat way of getting rid of a hazardous
industrial waste.
Emily McIvor is the Green Party’s spokesperson on
children’s
issues
More
information on the issue of fluoride in water can be found
at the National
Pure Water Association
If
you are particularly concerned about filtering out fluoride
for your tap water read about how
our filters can help with this specific problem
Read
More...
0800 009 6611
