Flouridation
In a letter to the Birmingham Post recently I wrote about the question of flouridation: It appears that the Health Secretary wants to see flouride added to all drinking water in the UK. The Government is also talking about consultation. I hope that this is a sincere intention because fundamental issues are raised.
There is evidence (although it can be exaggerated) that flouridation has some impact on dental health, especially amongst those who don’t look after their teeth. Those who do may benefit less, and decay rates have been improving across countries whether they add flouride or not. There is a downside in terms of flourosis (mottled teeth) and some research suggests possible links to hip fractures and bladder cancer.
In Birmingham flouride has been added since the 1960s. I do not recall having a choice in the matter. Certainly there is none now since filters do not remove flouride - a fact not often stated on the box.
The flouride issue is one example of population dosing, others being under consideration. I am concerned about this not simply on grounds of individual freedom (think also of the loss of same in our surveillance society) but also because, while health experts are usually right at least when they agree, when they are wrong the price can be very high indeed.
If there is a genuine debate (rather than the closely managed and selective ‘consultation’ we saw with hospital closures) then I for one would welcome this. But will those of us already flouridated be given a choice? I somehow doubt it. As, I assume, we are not likely to have a referendum then at least there should be a professional and independent opinion poll that would carry a measure of public trust.
