Dissent still over Timaru fluoride

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33806, 1 April 1975, Page 19

Dissent still over Timaru fluoride

( Bu

D. W. HODGE)

TI MARL .

Timaru has an official source of unfluoridated water at the Claremont Road reservoir. Chlorinated water may he taken from a 100« gallon tank near the reservoir, which is about four miles from the centre of the citv.

Apart from the inconvenience of collecting water here, many opponents of fluoridation refuse to go near the tank. They regard it as a sopjto pacify them and as a gesture to ease the City Council’s conscience about the poll. Many objectors to fluoridation have been harnessing' their own rainwater since’ fluoridation was introduced; in 1973.

Some store rainwater in; drums. Other “separatists” have large tanks. They reserve this water for drinking and cooking — “anything internal”. By no means all of the objectors stay away from Claremont. There, at all times of the day, people are filling their pitchers with what they regard as “pure” water — on average, 40 to 50 gallons a day. The immediate past-presi-dent of the Timaru Pure Water Association is Mr F. W. S. McGowan, who is now approaching the age of 80. He was president for 15 years. Throughout that time, the association waged a dogged, but losing, fight to prevent fluordiation of the Timaru water supply.

Old folk Mr McGowan says that he felt very strongly about fluoridation because of its possible harmful effects on older people. His concern now, he says, is not only for the people of Christchurch, who will resolve the question by referendum, but for any community likely to have fluoridation thrust upon them.

Although he remained silent at the time about the conduct of- the long campaign, he recalls now that when the association was fighting against fluoridation, members were subjected to abuse and indignities. “It is regrettable,” he says, “that some advocates of fluoridation went so far as to threaten their opponents by telephone and to show their disapproval in other ways — such as daubing paint on busihess premises. and obstructing mem-, bers of the association endeavouring to exhibit! photographs and publicity material in display windows. I am sure the people of Christchurch will be more rational in their behaviour, more level-headed in their approach to the question.”

“Rights lost”

Defining his objections to fluoridation, Mr McGowan says that its introduction strips people of their democratic rights. He rejects the assertion by the Department of Health that there had been a 50 per cent to 60 per cent reduction in dental

decay as a result of fluoridation. “Surely some credit must be given to the army of doctors, dentists, dental nurses,! and others,” he says. “Sure-' Jy we must expect them, and! the inundation of the market, with dental pastes, to con-! tribute towards this per-! centage.” He claims that eminent! physicians in all parts of the! world have proved that it is inadvisable to use sodium! ‘fluoride in public water sup-; plies. He believes that fluor-; !idation has an effect on the! ; bones, and that the insertion! of 1 per cent fluoride in the' ! water has a deleterious effect on brain tissues. “Is it too much to assume ! that many criminal tenden- ■ cies stem from this?”, he I asks.

Feelings within the Timaru Pure Water Association are still strongly against the council’s decision to fluoridate, several years after a referendum turned down the idea. '66 poll In October 1964 the council decided on fluoridation and later rejected a plea for a poll. In 1965 the council agreed to have a poll, which was held on March 28, 1966. Of the 6731 votes cast, 3745 were against fluoridation and 2986 were in favour. In 1972, however, the council decided to fluoridate its water supply. Until then, Oamaru and Timaru had the only large water supples between Bluff and Waimairi County that were not fluoridated.

The Oamaru Borough Council and Christchurch City Council are depriving children of a right, according to the principal dental officer in the Department of Health at Timaru (Mr Wulliarn C. Hunter). He is certainly pleased with Timaru’s action.

“I feel that a referendum is a waste of time and money although, as I do not reside in Christchurch, this is really not my concern,” he says.

“If the Christchurch City Council honestly feels that it has an adequately informed public, a referendum would be suitable. It krows that this is impossible and, therefore, from a health point of: view, the question of a referendum should never arise”, says Mr Hunter. Less treatment Timaru began fluoridating its water supply in August, 1973. The last centre to introduce fluoridation was Masterton — in September, 1974.

Christchurch is the largest city in Nev,' Zealand without a fluoridated water supply. Rotorua, Nelson, Napier and Wanganui are the only other cities without it. A poll on fluoridation in Picton last week rejected the measure by 958 votes to 397.

“Fighting dental decay by filling teeth is like resolving the problem of poliomyelitis by making more attractive crutches more quickly and cheaply,” Mr Hunter said. “In the Timaru health district. the teeth of Ashburton children are by far the best. 'There is really no comparison,” Mr Hunter says. He attributes this to nothing but fluoridation. Ashburton introduced flouridation in 1966, and the department has found that the ; children of Ashburton require only about half the Treatment necessary in the ,dental clinics compared with the children in Timaru and Oamaru. Dentists’ claims for children at high school level are running at half the cost of the claims from dentists in Timaru and Oamaru. “There are no recorded instances of anyone having been injuriously affected by the fluoridation of the water at the recommended level of one part fluoride to a milI lion parts of water,” said IMr Hunter. “It is a preventive measure, and the ■ process is benefitical and I safe for everyone — young and old.”

“Progressive”

He does not expect the results of fluoridation in Timaru to become evident until five years after its introduction. “There is little doubt that all the progressive areas in New Zealand have fluoridation. If people have the idea that it is good for their children, then they also have progressive ideas within their respective communities#’

Invercargill, he notes, is one of the most progressive cities in the South Island. In 1963 it was the first centre in the South Island to adopt fluoridation of the water supply. “The cost of introducing fluoridation has been infinitesimal when balanced against the benefits accruing to children,” says Mr Hunter.