The American Dental Association (ADA) and UK version of this agency, the British Dental Association (BDA), along with government agencies have long touted the benefits of fluoridating municipal water supplies to keep everyone’s teeth pearly white and without cavities, but what if you have no teeth? Truthfully, it doesn’t matter; fluoride is a toxic substance that shouldn’t be forced on the population, but even people without teeth are pushed to consume fluoride.
Local officials are being asked by government agencies in the UK to fluoridate their water again, even though millions currently drink unfluoridated water.
Only 6.1 million people in the UK currently drink fluoridated water, some of it being naturally fluoridated instead of forcibly tinkered with by adding sodium fluoride, a leftover from the fertilizer and mining industries. That amounts to only 10% of the entire population.
Why exactly the government would want to poison its people with fluoridated water when, as Dr. Hardy Limeback (and countless others), the former president of the Canadian Association for Dental Research says, “The evidence that fluoridation is more harmful than beneficial is now overwhelming,” is anyone’s guess.
As Dr. David Carlsson, former Nobel Laureate in Medicine has said, there is no reason to use fluoride in municipal water supplies as an ‘excuse’ to boost dental health. “Fluoridation goes against all principles of pharmacology. It is obsolete.”
Nonetheless, Health Secretary for the UK, Alan Johnson, says it’s time to improve England’s dental health, and urged putting fluoride in local drinking water to help reduce tooth decay in children, especially in poor areas. He also stressed that only three areas of the UK currently enjoy poisonous fluoridated water, and that “We need to go much further in areas where dental health needs to be improved.”
Why exactly do countries keep trying to use dental health as a reason to put a toxic substance in the water? Public Health England recently published a report stating that fluoridating water was not only good for dental health, but also good for other health benefits. Who are they kidding?
As the columnist of a Telegraph article discussing the subject points out, the science on this subject is anything but clear cut, so why would you want to put something that’s possibly toxic in water at all? Recent studies show that it lowers IQ scores and causes neurodegeneration. Even if fluoridation did help to improve dental health, would that be worth crippling an entire population mentally?
UK government officials would be wise to consider the fate of the former mayor of Andover, Gordon Simpson. At his town’s municipal elections he was swept out of his office by enraged anti-fluoride activists that didn’t want to take a chance ingesting an industrial waste in their water. The former mayor, Olive Harvey was so appalled at the idea of adding fluoride to her own city water, she sank a borehole into the garden of her home so she could bypass it, thereby avoiding drinking polluted water full of nasty chemicals. Andover has been fluoride-free ever since.
Even when public health officials publish encouraging data about fluoride efficacy, they face fierce local objections. Back in the 1990s a major battle broke out over water fluoridation in the North East of the UK. Over 70% of the population backed fluoridating the water supply after city officials convinced them it was safe, but Northumbria Water rejected the proposal to fluoridate the water fearing being sued.
In this case, large masses of people do not want their water fluoridated, so suggesting it is a very unwise political move. City council members should take heed. The masses will not be poisoned willingly. Even if you have no teeth, you still need your brain.