Fluoride Action Network

Right to be angry about poison in the water

Source: The Observer | September 7th, 2003 | Letters
Location: United Kingdom, England

People are right to be angry about plans to fluoridate water supplies (News, last week). Under the European Convention on Human Rights and Medicine, a patient must give consent to medication, and be free to withdraw consent at any time. Fluoridation destroys that right.

Evidence around the world suggests fluoridation does not reduce tooth decay, and many European countries abandoned the policy years ago. Yet the Government seems determined to fluoridate our water supplies without telling us.

Martyn Shrewsbury
Health spokesman, Green Party, Swansea


The fluoride used in water fluoridation is not pharmaceutical grade but toxic waste from phosphate fertiliser factory chimneys which is registered as a poison under the 1972 Poisons Act. It is more poisonous than lead and only slightly less poisonous than arsenic.

Health Minister Hazel Blears said those who objected could use filters or buy bottled water. To remove fluoride needs a plumbed-in reverse osmosis unit costing hundreds of pounds. Bottled water is expensive, heavy to carry and creates plastic waste. Bottled water would have to be used for cooking, too, since fluoride in water gets more concentrated when boiled.

A. Wills
Ruislip, Middlesex


We expected the data pointing to the dangers of fluoride to lead to the practice being stopped after a 30-year trial. It is with disbelief that we learn the Government is trying to fluoridate the whole country.

Cynthia Bagchi
Bedford Allergy Support Group


Sheila Jones claims ‘fluoride is completely safe’. Yet the issue at stake is a change in legislation permitting the Government – or rather the taxpayer – to indemnify water companies against liability for illnesses caused when the Government forces them into administering this unpopular and undemocratic mass medication.

Shanti Mahan
London N19


Basel in Switzerland stopped water fluoridation because it found absolutely no improvement. Many studies show no difference in decay rates. Even if it made a difference it would still be fraudulent, disposing of highly toxic waste from the fertiliser industry by trickling it into the water supply.

Matthew Parkes
Dublin, Ireland