This is a letter written by Jason Greenwood of Belmont, NZ, regarding the issue of fluoridation to MP, Wayne Mapp.
I am currently working with a group of concerned citizens on the shore to try and get fluoride removed from our drinking water. Once the new Super City Council is formed, we will be making submissions on the matter to them as it will then affect all Aucklanders. It is very interesting to note that the bulk of councils in NZ do not fluoridate but that the councils governing the most people do. I got involved in the fluoride debate when I had a knee injury that caused me to research joint damage, with Fluorosis as a possible cause. Even most dentists that support fluoride to prevent dental carries admit that it should be applied topically, NOT systemically as is done with water fluoridation.
Our major concerns with fluoridation are as follows:
1) New medical research results re dangers of fluoride
There is a large and growing body of evidence that demonstrates that fluoride is not only cumulative but highly toxic and ultimately deadly to humans:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7547385139152764985&hl=en# (Professional Perspectives)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4519697926101725336# (interview with Dr. A.K. Susheela)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3949434744498031545&hl=en# (An Interview with journalist Christopher Bryson)
Proponents of fluoridation have claimed that low dose fluoride is “safe” for over 50 years. However, scientists are only now beginning to study the subtle and chronic effects of fluoride, including disruption to neurological,
developmental and hormonal systems, and synergistic toxicity with other compounds. In 2006, the US National Academy of Science reviewed existing data and concluded, “On the basis of information largely derived from
histological, chemical, and molecular studies, it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means.” They did not identify a level of fluoride that was
safe for consumption, and said further research was paramount.
It is worth noting that a huge number of medical professionals oppose fluoridation on medical/health grounds:
In addition, the dosage of fluoride that people receive will vary with their water consumption.
2) Biological and eco-system toxicity build-up
We have a situation now where citizens are being dosed not only with fluoride but with Prozac and many other drugs and chemicals. When excreted, these toxins build up in our waterways (used for agricultural irrigation of course), oceans and other ecosystems, wreaking havoc with the source of all life on this planet. It is our view that water supplies should be jealously guarded and protected with robust laws and rules that protect both
humans and animals to the greatest possible extent. Fluoridation does not meet this criteria in our view. It is also our view that water quality should be judged solely on what is removed from it, not what is added to it.
3) The slippery slope effect
Due to the ‘success’ of fluoride in the water, serious discussions are currently taking place globally about adding other chemicals such as Lithium and Prozac to water supplies:
It simply sets a bad precedent and we feel using the water supply as a drug delivery system is ethically, morally and medically reprehensible.
4) Personal Choice
We feel that it should be personal choice as to whether to take fluoride. It should be opt-in, not opt-out. If the councils/MOH insist on subsidising fluoride, they should subsidise tablets instead, so that citizens have a
genuine choice. Even if my drinking water is filtered I still have to bathe in fluoride and inhale it in the form of steam. The NZ bill of rights states:
“Right to refuse to undergo medical treatment”
The right to refuse should not be based on an ‘opt-out’ option.
Thank you for your time in this matter.
| 196B Lake Rd., Belmont | 021-843-160 | email@example.com