The High Court heard today that the South Central Strategic Health Authority unlawfully forced the fluoridation of Southampton’s water.
Only 28% of local residents who responded to the public consultation were in favor, the overall majority opposed what has been called ‘forced medication’.
Southampton resident Geraldine Milner told Mr Justice Holman that Fluoridation of water supplies without the consent of citizens is against Government policy and unlawful.
The SCSHA and Southern Water began the fluoridation process in February 2009 despite the opposition, a move Milner’s counsel called a failing in their legal obligation to properly assess the cogency of the arguments for and against mass fluoridation.
So what are the arguments?
According to the British Dental Foundation:
Fluoride is a natural mineral that is found in many foods and in all drinking water to some degree…Fluoride can greatly help dental health by strengthening the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to tooth decay. It also reduces the amount of acid that the bacteria on your teeth produce. Children living in poorer areas where the water supplies are not fluoridated can have 5 times more decay than children living in better-off or fluoridated areas. Research suggests that adding fluoride to the water is the best way of reducing these ‘dental inequalities’.
There are a number of important scientific and ethical points that are often brushed over by pro-fluoridators.
The Fluoride artificially added to water supplies and most dental products is NOT the naturally occurring Calcium Fluoride mineral found in foods and springs, it’s either Hexafluorosilicic Acid or Disodium Hexafluorosilicate, the by-products of the phosphate fertiliser and aluminum manufacturing industries. These chemicals are commonly called Sodium Fluoride.
As stated by The Water Act 2003, only two dosing agents to increase fluoride content are allowed. These are Hexafluorosilicic Acid and Disodium Hexafluorosilicate. None of which are natural Calcium Fluoride.
Although natural fluoride and these by-products dissociate (split up) in the body to produce free fluoride ions, what is rarely mentioned is that the by-products, known as Silicofluorides leave behind a “residual” compound – which according to Masters and Coplan:
Increase Uptake and Absorption of Lead from the Environment.
Commonly UK health officials will also claim that there is no evidence that added fluoride of 1ppm (parts per million) has negative effects on health. However studies show this to be a lie for certain sectors of the population.
Kidney problems are high on the list. [1]
A small and inclusive amount of research suggests that fluoridation of community water actually causes kidney disease. Kidney damage to tubular function and structure, and reduction in glomerular filtration rate occurred in residents of endemic fluoride areas and anecdotal cases of fluoride intoxication suggested a causal relationship between fluoride intake and renal failure.
…A fairly substantial body of research indicates that patients with chronic renal insufficiency are at an increased risk of chronic fluoride toxicity. Patients with reduced glomerular filtration rates have a decreased ability to excrete fluoride in the urine. These patients may develop skeletal fluorosis even at 1 ppm fluoride in the drinking water.
Also, adverse effects on IQ have been found at levels as low as 0.9 ppm among children with Iodine deficiencies and 1.8 ppm among children with adequate nutrient intake. [2].
Iodine is a common deficiency. For example a study by doctors in Scotland found that 40% of women across the UK consume less than half of the recommended levels of iodine. [3]
It is also known to cause thyroid problems. [4]
Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield, a thyroid specialist states:
“There is no doubt that fluoride is enzyme disruptive and one thing it affects is thyroid hormones.” [5]
Are we simply to ignore those that are more susceptible to fluoride related problems?
As we go slightly higher than 1ppm, more shocking effects can be noted.
According to the US National Research Council, fluoride can diminish bone strength and increase the risk of bone fracture. While the NRC was unable to determine what level of fluoride is safe for bones, it noted that the best available information suggests that fracture risk may be increased at levels as low 1.5 ppm, which is only slightly higher than the recommended 1ppm added to UK water.
Other risks at higher doses include Dental fluorosis (spots or damage to teeth), bone cancer in young boys[6]; low birth rates, sperm count, and testosterone levels, and an increase in Alzheimer disease, Dementia and Attention Deficit Disorder.
And remember the 1ppm found in UK water is only one source. There is fluoride in food, toothpaste, mouthwash and bottled drinks. Some children are even given extra fluoride drops. This can then increase fluoride intake beyond what even the pro-fluoridators consider safe.
Worryingly, the most up to date evidence suggests that Fluoride would only be beneficial for tooth decay if applied directly. According to the Centers for Disease Control, fluoride’s “predominant effect is post-eruptive and topical”. [7]
As published in the British Medical Journal:
“Fluoride is most effective when used topically, after the teeth have erupted.”
Ingesting fluoride through the water supply is therefore becoming a redundant theory.
This doesn’t stop the BBC however showcasing dentists who still claim young children should be drinking fluoride while their teeth are forming.
Babies exposed to fluoride are at high risk of developing dental fluorosis caused by fluoride damaging the cells which form the teeth [8]. Other tissues in the body may also be affected by early-life exposures to fluoride. According to a review published in the medical journal The Lancet, fluoride may damage the developing brain, causing learning deficits and other problems.
It is still debated whether any amount is effective for anyone.
Dr John Colquhoun, former Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, New Zealand changed his mind about fluoride when his worldwide study revealed that dental decay was “slightly better in children in non-fluoridated areas”. [9]
Although the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency decided that the chemicals added to drinking water in the UK are not medicinal products, that doesn’t automatically quell the argument that fluoridation is akin to forced medication.
The dictionary definition of medication is “something that treats or prevents or alleviates the symptoms of disease”. Tooth decay is classed as a disease.
So unless they are admitting that fluoride doesn’t work, what we are seeing is PR spin.
5.5 million people have no choice but to drink water with this sythentic chemical. And if the government cares so much about our health why not add whole food vitamin supplements like Vitamin D or C to help with winter flu rates?
It would be a grave democratic injustice if the high court ruled against the 72% of people in Southampton that did not want this in their water.
Map of Fluoridation in UK.
