Share this page

Small ads

Fluoridation of West Yorkshire water

From Vivienne H

Sunday, 24 October 2021

One of the many new rules the government has slid past during lockdown, is the regulation requiring all water companies to add fluoride to the domestic water supply.

Whenever this has been proposed in the past, Yorkshire Water has been persuaded not to do it. This time, it appears they won’t have a choice.

I sent a Freedom of Information request asking the government to specify the date on which this will begin; how many parts per million they propose to add; whether the source of the fluoride is industrial waste & if not, whence it’s derived; & what monitoring of local post-fluoridation health they propose to do.

Today I received a form letter saying the Dept of Health & Social Care is too busy to respond to individual enquiries. 

They appended an email address for complaints, so I used it to say I didn’t consider that response acceptable. The email was returned as Undeliverable. 

If I’m the only person who cares about this I won’t pursue it. But for one thing, people with hypothyroidism need to know that for some years, fluoride was used to treat an excess of thyroid hormones because it inhibits thyroid function. If you use fluoridated water in drinks, food and for bathing, day after day, it’s going to have the same effect. A 2015 study confirms this: Water fluoridation in England linked to higher rates of underactive thyroid.

People with kidney problems may also have cause for concern.

I find it objectionable that the government is forcing this on everyone with the justification that fluoride is good for children’s teeth. 

There’s certainly some evidence for that,  but the studies I’ve seen emphasise that topical application is the most effective, ie putting fluoride in toothpaste. Other dental practitioners argue that vitamin D protects oral health better than fluoride. 

There is certainly insufficient evidence that forcing everyone to ingest fluoride on a permanent basis is risk-free, even for those not already in vulnerable groups. Is anyone else interested in taking this up with the Council?

From Josephine Hallgarth

Sunday, 24 October 2021

I object to bring forcefully medicated with fluoride.

I agree that the government's response is not acceptable. If they have the time to pass legislation adding chemicals to our water they ought to be able to prove they are doing it in a responsible way.

From Anne Knight

Tuesday, 7 December 2021

I'm concerned about this. Does no one remember how Dennis Edmundson from Pecket Well fought this, all the letters he wrote to the Halifax Courier? I brought the subject up with Josh Fenton Glynn on Twitter but he didn't seem to know what I was on about. Medication without consent is wrong, especially with something so potentially damaging as fluoride. The fact that the majority don't know this is happening is worrying.

From Jae Evans

Tuesday, 7 December 2021

I agree with all the aforementioned comments: this is potentially a danger to our health.  It concerns me greatly.

It is completely unnecessary and just side lines or ignores the longer term issues around public health. When the government has systematically, cut NHS Dental funding over decades, making access to a Dentist impossible for some and difficult for others. When our nation seemingly, has a ubiquitous culture of exposing children to all manner of rubbish: sugar, chemicals, fizzy drinks and sweets and when vending machines are placed in schools selling all this rubbish: the government's policy plan is to poison us all with yet more chemicals.

I am certainly not apathetic but I have 'fought' this twice before and I simply don't have the energy to do so again.  I sincerely hope someone will take up this battle because this is what it will undoubtedly be - a battle.  Yet it can be done. There is always hope. Good Luck!  

From Vivienne H

Saturday, 11 December 2021

Shall we try involving the GP practices in this? A bit of collective action is required here. If one person writes to the Group Practice, they can be dismissed, but if 100 of us do, it would be harder to ignore. If we can get anyone there to express concern, in writing, that would be a start.

We can approach the Council to see if anyone there's interested in helping. However, it is the Secretary of State who has appropriated the power in this matter, so that's the person we will ultimately have to approach. Yorkshire Water pretty much said they have to do as they're told.

I doubt that Craig Whittaker would oppose his Party, but perhaps someone who knows him might suggest it. 

The blurb about the Bill making fluoridation mandatory insists there's no evidence it's harmful. Nelson, telescope, blind eye.

From Andy M

Monday, 20 December 2021

A view here:

Bad science: To fluoridate or not to fluoridate: the saga continues

From George Murphy

Tuesday, 21 December 2021

Thanks Andy M for providing a link to a reputable and recent scientific report on this topic.

It's important to use such sources when arguing about medical and other matters, especially in times like this.

From Jenny S

Tuesday, 21 December 2021

Just for info - the legislation for fluoridisation of water hasn't yet been passed by Parliament. It's part of the dire Health and Care Bill that's currently at the Report stage in the House of Lords. Green Jenny Jones spoke out against this (and other aspects of the Bill) at its recent second reading in the House of Lords. 

From Vivienne H

Thursday, 23 December 2021

Those people referring to the Bad Science article may wish to read an updated article by the same Phillipe Grandjean whose work is cited therein.

Developmental fluoride neurotoxicity: an updated review

Dr Grandjean, an environmental epidemiologist who teaches at the Harvard School of Public Health, as a result of his extensive research now regards fluoridation of water as unnecessary, given that the same protection against dental caries can be achieved by using fluoridated toothpaste. 

More importantly, he has declared that concern about fluoride neurotoxicity, especially in the developing brain of infants where it is associated with lower IQ, is warranted. The same goes for thyroid disorders. He notes that what is harmless to the majority may have adverse effects on susceptible genotypes. 

The bibliography for this article included over 100 studies. So I agree, let's look at the science. But not rely on articles whose findings have been superseded by further studies.

At the least, there are clear risks in compulsory fluoridation and no guarantee that it is safe. The government does not propose to monitor the public health risk by comparing thyroid function, infant development,  or indeed the feminisation of men before and after prolonged exposure.  They will claim that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

Gene-environment interaction: Does fluoride influence the reproductive hormones in male farmers modified by ERα gene polymorphisms?

Why risk it for a gain that can be achieved by using your preferred toothpaste?

From Jill Robinson

Tuesday, 4 January 2022

I remember Mr. Dennis Edmondson campaigning tirelessly for many years against fluoridation of the water supply. I am no chemist but recall that fluoride (not an essential nutrient) displaces iodine, which is essential, leading to thyroid problems. I accompanied Dennis to a public meeting where an environmental expert from New Zealand who had previously been in favour of fluoridation spoke against it, having reviewed all available evidence. This was in the late 1980s and there will now be many more recent studies, but many other countries were at the time discontinuing fluoridation just as some areas of the UK were adopting it. Consuming less sugary food and drink would improve health in general as well as having a beneficial  effect on dental health.