Fluoridation of the water supply is almost certainly a good idea. However, your editorial does the idea a disservice by denigrating the objections of opponents as “half-baked” (“Stop worrying and learn to love fluoridated water,” April 24).

As I understand it, the opponents’ chief concern is one of principle: being forced to accept adulteration of what they feel should be a pure and clear necessity of life. The situation cannot be equated with vaccination, since the person with tooth decay is not a menace to the public health. Particularly onerous is the suggestion that if they don’t like it, they can buy distilled water.

It is axiomatic to free discussion in a democracy that dissenting opinions be treated with respectful consideration, rather than disdainful dismissal.

Peter B. Rosenberger
Winchester

Print PDF