From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2009-02-27 09:25:02
Attachments : news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/… Video: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/… —–Original Message—–From: Sent: 26 February 2009 19:54To: ad.johnson@ntlworld….Subject: Flouride Attack. NHS force city flouride increase Demonstrators greeted health bosses in Southampton Should fluoride be forced upon us? Fluoride will be added to tap water in Southampton after health bosses voted through the plans despite protests. It is the first time a health trust in England, rather than water companies, has been allowed to introduce fluoridation under new laws. The idea has proved controversial with 72% of 10,000 respondents in a public consultation opposing the plan. But despite the opposition the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA) unanimously backed the move. Southampton City Council was in favour but Hampshire County Council was against the plan, which is designed to cut tooth decay and which will affect 200,000 people. Southampton City Primary Care Trust (PCT) will now be allowed to instruct Southern Water to increase levels of fluoride from 0.08 part to 1 part per million. The PCT said more than 40% of children in the area were suffering from tooth decay and the increase was desperately needed. I think it is absolutely disgraceful, they have refused to listen to all the evidence we have given them John Spottiswoode, Hampshire Against Fluoridation Bob Deans, chief executive for the PCT, said: “We are very pleased that following an extensive public consultation, SCSHA has decided to introduce a water fluoridation scheme. “We continue to believe that a water fluoridation scheme, when introduced with continued oral health promotion, will be the most effective way of reducing the large numbers of tooth fillings and extractions currently needed by children in Southampton.” The SCSHA said the problem of tooth decay among children and adults in Southampton was worse than the national average across England, despite a number of public health measures that have already been adopted in the city. But opponents claim fluoride has negative effects on the body and vowed to contest the decision in the courts. John Spottiswoode, chairman of Hampshire Against Fluoridation, said: “I think it is absolutely disgraceful, they have refused to listen to all the evidence we have given them. “They have ignored the will of the people, 72% didn’t want it and yet they still are going to do it. It is deeply unethical. “We think it’s illegal and are thinking what we do next, maybe taking it to the courts in Europe.”
