MAY I reply to P Osbourne's letter re the pros and cons of fluoridation without being hysterical.
The primary reason put forward for fluoridation is, I believe, the reduction of tooth decay among children in areas where fluoride is present in drinking water. It does not in any way improve the quality of the drinking water.
Fluoride can be added to toothpaste and I have not read anything to say that this method has had the desired effect.
Ask any dentist they will tell you that the primary cause of tooth decay in children is sugar.
My dentist informs me that it is not the amount of sugar at any one time, but it is the number of times a day the teeth are washed with sugar from drinks, sweets etc that causes the teeth to rot.
Therefore, the surest way to prevent tooth decay is to minimise the amounts of sugar used in food and sweets etc. Take a look at food labels, even a tin of beans contains sugar, so every time you consume convenience foods and drink, your teeth are washed with sugar.
My teeth were formed during the war years, when sugar and sweets were on ration, and I still have most of my teeth at 59 years of age.
Regular brushing, sugar-free drinks and sweets and parental education are the answer to healthy teeth.
Now if we accept that fluoridation is the answer, then the Water Authorities will be adding a poison to the drinking water.
All poisons and drugs have some side effects and no one in authority can say otherwise, and, let's face it, no one in their right mind takes poison.
If your doctor prescribes drugs and you suffer side effects, your doctor can change the drug or you can stop taking them and the side effects will probably go away.
What happens if people suffer side effects from fluoride? Will the authorities accept responsibility? I think not
Osmosis filters are available to remove fluoride from drinking water, and these should be made freely available to those people who do not wish to consume fluoride.
So, I would suggest that we should be given the unbiased facts from both sides and freedom of choice in that, if anyone decides not to take fluoride, they should be provided with osmosis filters to remove it.
The most important thing to consider is that it is up to the individual to decide if he or she wishes to take fluoride, and not some local health officials who think they know best and wish to take the easy option.
Remember this: someone who thought they knew best decided to feed the remains of sheep to cattle and look what problems that caused, and no one is in a hurry to take responsibility.
Mr J Drakley
Normanby Street, Bolton
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article