There is is big anti-fluoridisation campaign on in the Sunraysia Region and I imagine the rest of Victoria, as the State Government is talking about it's introduction. This letter is just the latest in a long line.
Letter to Editor
19 Feb 2010
Landholders should be angry
HAD to laugh when I read the letter by Todd Harper from Vic Health (February 12).
What a parody of jokes.
Here we read about smoke-free streets to combat ill-health caused by second-hand smoke that smokers are polluting our streets with.
Previously we have read about the banning of smoking in cars with children aboard, yet we are prepared to feed our children the same chemicals in far greater dosage through the water that they must drink.
So target a minority group (I am not a smoker).
Pass on the other side of the street if you are bothered by them.
Why can't their employer provide them with an area that they can use? After all it is not yet illegal to smoke cigarettes.
In reply to John Bunney of Irymple, the referendum was the first stage in what will be a long battle in our fight against a greedy and ill-in- formed government, a government that recalls toys because they have traces of heavy metals in their paint but tells us it's okay for our children to drink these same heavy metals, some of which are lead, cadmium and mercury as well traces of the semi-metal arsenic, and I ask you, to what end?
There was a commercial long ago which advertised fluoride toothpaste and showed children that the fluoride gets into teeth just like the colour of the water got into
Now we are being told that it works from the inside out and is good for the foetus, babies, children, teenagers up to the elderly, even if you don't have teeth, or at least that is implied if we all have to drink it.
Contemporary research overseas has been showing us that fluoride is dangerous, but no independent research in Australia is being used to show that there could be a connection between fluoride and cancer, fluoride and Alzheimer's, fluoride and fluorosis of both teeth and the skeletal system. Why?
I say it's the almighty dollar talking.
The fertiliser and to some extent the coal industries are selling their waste to the government who must get rid of it, so it sells it to councils by forcing them to use it even if their people do not want it.
In the playground that would be called bullying, and would be addressed, not so in reality and especially if it is coming from our government.
There is no democracy. It matters little what people actually want.
I can choose to buy products that do not contain fluoride but I will have no choice if it is added to the water.
Des Harwood's claim that "I am grateful that I grew up with fluoride in my drinking water" (February 13) maybe one of those people who do not react to its side effects.
He would be grateful for the many thousands of additives added to our food also, and he probably does not have children that are affected also.
What about the people who are allergic to it and who cannot toler-
They will now be forced to drink the very substance that makes them sick.
Abroad an association was made between the antisocial behaviour of society and fluoride.
What of the people in Tasmania who have the worst teeth in Australia?
Has fluoride been of benefit to them; no it has not there are many cursing its addition.
I say no more. An interesting web site is at: http://www.green-facts.org/en/fluoride/fluorides-2 /02-environment.htm#0.