Fluoridation

Press, 19 September 1985, Page 14

Fluoridation

Sir,—The mythology of fluorida.tionism parallels that of Christian fundamentalism. You reported on September 9 an open letter by 10 scientists and dentists in which the authors attempted to excuse the coercion of fluoridation by claiming that fluoride is an essential nutrient (which, however, neither justifies force-feeding nor explains why the consumption of truly essential nutrients, such as iodine, is voluntary). The quoted claim that “the bony skeleton cannot develop normally without fluoride” has to mean here that nothing less than added fluoride to 1 p.p.m. will do. Water from. Christchurch City wells normally contains from 0.05-0.10 p.p.m. of fluoride. Thus, fluoridated water would contain 1900 — 900 per cent more fluoride than at present — a huge increase. Consequently my unfluoridated bony skeleton must have smashed like eggshells when my 100 kg body was thrown heavily along the pavement by a speeding runner a few months ago. Massive bruising, yes; broken bones, no, in fact.—Yours, etc., PAUL MALING. September 15, 1985.

Sir,—E. G. Pressley (September 14) accused me of “misinterpretation” by “omitting that all seven specialists advising the Swedish Fluoride Commission declared fluoridation effective and safe, and in not disclosing that the Canadian ‘Environmental Fluoride’ reports research in that, not fluoridation.” On the contrary, I have stressed that the commission and the Canadian report drew on a wider range of scientific evidence than that selected and supplied by the more narrowly-committed dental and medical experts, like the seven advisers Mr Pressley mentions. Mr Pressley quoted from an early report of mine. I have since realised that both sides in controversies select evidence, but that fluoridation proponents are even worse offenders. E. W. Hullett (September 14) stated that I “exaggerated the severity of fluorosis.” Readers of the Auckland studies can judge, but, exaggerated or not, dental fluorosis which is damaged and defective enamel was shown by both studies to be significantly more prevalent in fluoridated areas. — Yours, etc., JOHN COLQUHOUN, Auckland. September 17, 1985.