Letters to Editor: Fluoridation is mass medication

Fluoridation is mass medication
Reference is made to the letter "Council Gutless" by Dr DMJ Barry re fluoridation of public water supplies.
After having read his comments, one can only conclude that his comments are nothing more than a storm in a cup filled with fluoridated tap water.
Apparently, Dr Barry tries to profile himself as a guru on fluoridation issues, without stating any convincing evidence that fluoridation of tap water is morally justified (mass medication).
This is in contrast to what Dr Paul Connett, a well-known international expert on fluoride issues, has been advocating during his recent visit to New Zealand and his various lectures, during which he proved how flawed many research papers are on this issue and have been manipulated by so-called researchers.
One question relating to this is why is there no research information available from the Hastings District Council in comparison with those of the Napier City Council, where the tap water has never been fluoridated.
I have been told that the reason is that there is no difference and that some "experts" do not want to lose face.
But if Dr Barry is such a knowledgeable person in favour of fluoridation, hopefully he can then advise us how many litres of fluoridated tap water a person, with an average bodyweight, has to drink daily to make the intake of fluoride effective.
If I do need medication, I first have to see my general practitioner and obtain a prescription before I can obtain my medication.
How can a group of district councillors enforce medication on their electorate for those who do not want this? There are other means of applying fluoride for those who need/want it e.g tablets, toothpaste.
And if Dr Barry and the District Health Board are so concerned about the oral health of a group within the socio-lower class within our community, why not develop and introduce educational programmes focusing on the right diets and condemn sugary products, including fizzy drinks, which are the cause of unhealthy teeth. I have never seen any poster or educational material on this issue in a dentist's waiting room.
As suggested by Dr Barry, I have Googled this issue many times. One of the most impressive statements I have read was the following by Dr David Carlsson, winner of the Nobel prize for Medicine in 2000: "I am quite convinced that water fluoridation, in a not-too-distant future, will be consigned to medical history".
Other useful websites are: www.europeannationsspeakoutagainstfluoridation and www.water fluoridation.J
GN Tinholt, Havelock North
Let us vote
The arrogant comments from Hawke's Bay District Health Board chairman Kevin Atkinson regarding the fluoridation referendum show no empathy for ratepayers' right to choose.
Mr Atkinson says a referendum ignores expert advice. I find this strange given the Health Ministry recently received a report showing no advantages for fluoridation of water.
He then accuses the council of turning a health issue into a political issue.
No, Mr Atkinson. Council has turned a political issue into a health issue. And that's the way it should be.
However, a golden opportunity will exist should the referendum favour stopping fluoridation. By keeping before and after statistics for illnesses anti-fluoridation lobbyists claim are caused by fluoridation, trends should emerge given time.
But I don't believe Mr Atkinson should panic. The reality is most folk don't care. Issues like fluoridation go over their heads. In such situations they usually vote for the status quo.
K C Wellwood, Hastings
No debt ... yeah right
Have you seen the latest Tui ad? It seems that in the event of an amalgamation of Napier and Hastings, Hastings' massive debts will be "ring-fenced" so that Napier ratepayers won't have to share the burden.
Does Chris Tremain actually think we're stupid enough to believe that?
Hardie Martin, Napier
Road safety
If the Hastings and Napier city councils were to amalgamate, what roading theory would they be likely to implement?
The Napier theory, where for safety reasons, they are making roads wider by prohibiting roadside parking, as on Milton Rd, or the Hastings theory, where for safety reasons, they are making roads narrower, as on Jervois St. They can't both be right - or wrong.Malcolm ClarkFlaxmereWattie's experienceMr Nash, you have not a clue what you are saying, I am sure Wattie's has more expertise than you will ever have. Tremain and Goss have done their research, I am sure.
Richard Mackinnon, Haumoana