I suggest a campaign about ...

Stop adding flouride to our water supplies. Flouride is a known poison with many deleterious effects

124 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Malcolm BradstockMalcolm Bradstock shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    44 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Rhys Rhys commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The reason fluoride campaigns currently have no teeth is because there are lots of people carrying out their own campaigns fighting hard, sending letters and getting no responses but no one organisation is heading the campaign with all these people within it. If all the people across all those organisations got together, they'd be a single voice and numbers to petition properly. Communication about what was current, what was happening in terms of campaigning would help everyone know what was going on. The other thing that would happen is that it would have enough membership to cobble the cash together to take this blind government to court for criminal negligence and stop them from getting water companies to do their dirty work. It's not their fault, they have to do it by law. This said, they could have some balls and stand up, do their own research and say no. As they happen to be putting fluoride into the water, they are culpable and given the number of people suffering illnesses, I would imagine they wouldn't be out of the firing line in the event of court hearings being started given that they have a duty of care to their customers.

      • Rhys Rhys commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        He'll realise too late when he suffers a broken hip at 60 and keeps taking his treatment for hypothyroidism. Dentists are not the ones to talk to. It's mothers who need to know.... they are the ones feeding their babies formula with tap water laced with fluoride. If they actually knew the damage that was occurring, you'd have to block your ears for the shouting. It would stop then.

      • John CJohn C commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        People don't vote because they believe all the c**p about how wonderful it is! I had an argument with my dentist, he would not accept that it is a harmful chemical! I asked him if he knew what is was made from, he didn't know but commented that it must be pretty pure and harmless if all the toothpaste companies use it! I tried to explain the "slight" difference between Fluoride used in toothpaste and the silicofluorides put in our drinking water but he then backed backed off saying he was too busy to get involved in pointless discussions!

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This is so important, it baffles me that more people aren't voting for this! We are being poisoned daily by the very thing we need more than anything else for our health and well being. The reason so many millions of people are on antidepressants, the reason a lot of people don't dream anymore, the reason people have low fertility, low testosterone, low energy and spiritual essence is because of fluoride. It is also the reason so many people don't care about what's going on in the world and are so compliant is because of this harmful chemical. Please vote against fluoride!

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please also Support AVAAZ Petitions Against Water Fluoridation
        There are currently two AVAAZ petitions on water fluoridation - please sign these. In the UK a petition has been started to send to the UK Government. You can sign the petition here on the AVAAZ site: http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Stop_Poisoning_Our_Water_With_Fluoride
        In the USA, a “stop fluoridation” petition has been started by Gerald Steel — a lawyer from Washington State who has been fighting fluoridation at the legal level. The petition is also on the AVAAZ.org site. Sign the petition at: http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Stop_Water_Fluoridation/?eqTIiab
        Please help by sending these to everyone you know.

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        On the 31st March this year, SHAs will be abolished and their
        powers relating to water fluoridation will pass to local authorities. In March 2012 following over a year of contentious debate and political manoeuvring, the Health and Social Care Act was finally passed.
        Sections 35-37 are of particular relevance to the fluoridation debate and, most importantly, the current situation here in Southampton. So four years after ignoring the public outcry over water fluoridation, the South Central Strategic Health Authority will cease to exist.
        What does this mean?
        The Act amends the provisions of the Water Act 2003 related to
        water fluoridation schemes. From April 2013, decisions about whether to introduce and end schemes will be made by local authorities — in our case Southampton City Council and Hampshire County Council.
        Fortunately both Councils currently oppose water fluoridation but if
        the SHA implements the scheme before April, both Councils will
        become financially liable for funding the scheme. While it would be technically simple for the Councils
        to stop adding fluoride to the water, it would be disgraceful for the SHA, at this late stage, to rush to
        purchase £100,000s worth of capital equipment with the full knowledge that it may never be used.
        From April Southampton City and Hampshire County Councils will also become responsible for oral health promotion. For Southampton City Council this would be a great opportunity to invest the money that would be wasted on water fluoridation in targeted community based oral health schemes such as those being pioneered in some areas of the UK. In particular, ChildSmile — the national Scottish scheme — has been shown to reduce levels of dental decay and inequalities in oral health. This month the Scottish Government announced that the scheme had been more successful than expected delivering substantial reductions in dental decay amongst young children by over 25% since 2006. More importantly Childsmile has been shown to have impact across all groups and ages with a dramatic decrease in dental caries among three-year-olds. This is the sort of scheme that our Council’s should be
        considering if we really want to tackle dental health problems in the city. Water fluoridation is an
        obsolete policy based on outdated and poor research. Councils have the opportunity to take the lead in addressing oral health problems amongst the youngest children — an approach that would receive the backing of local childrens’ services, schools, social services and community and voluntary groups. HAF has written to the City Council urging them to invite the Scottish ChildSmile team to Southampton to brief Councillors and Officers on how to emulate ChildSmile’s success.

        .www.hampshireagainstfluoridation.org

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        In Canada, the USA and New Zealand many places have stopped fluoridating their water with several million people now enjoying fluoride-free drinking water. Since September 2012 alone, some half-a-million people have stopped receiving fluoridated water. These include the following communities:
        December 2012: Pine Island, Florida (13,000 water customers), Kirkland Lake, Ontario, Canada (8,133)
        November 2012: Milton, Florida (7,000), Bradford, Vermont (788), Romulus, New York State (400),
        Pulaski, New York State (2,367), Wichita, Kansas (385,000), Harvard, Nebraska (1,000), Crescent City, California (14,000)
        October 2012: Pulaski, New York (2,367), Lake View, Iowa (1,300)
        Cassadaga and Lily Dale, New York State (900)
        Spetember 2012: Waipukurau, New Zealand (4,000)
        In New Hampshire in the USA, local water suppliers will now have to include a warning on water bills
        advising customers about the risks of using fluoridated water for infant formula. Most recently in Australia, the State of Queensland has revoked the law on mandatory water fluoridation and many Councils are now considering ending fluoridation. Current battles are being waged in Portland, Oregon and many smaller communities across the world. In these places, as in Southampton, local councils and local people are fighting to keep their water fluoride-free.
        For more news about these communities and for up-to-date information about fluoridation see the
        Fluoride Action Network website: http://www.fluoridealert.org/

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Irish campaigner, Robert Pocock of Ireland Against Fluoridation (www.irelandagainstfluoridation.org/news)continues to expose the way the Irish government misleads the public about water fluoridation.
        Robert says that “EU Embassies in Dublin were today warned that the guide for healthcare profession-als Best practice for infant feeding in Ireland published by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland in November 2012 is seriously misleading and not protective of bottle-fed babies. What is described as 'Best practice for infant feeding' in Ireland is not even safe or indeed legal in other EU member-states. Since the Irish government propagates misleading advice which actually places the most
        vulnerable (newborn infants) at risk, Ambassadors may wish to warn their fellow nationals in Ireland. In particular they should advise parents of newborns here not to use Irish tap water to make up infant formula, contrary to official Irish government advice.”

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        “Fluoride, as such, is never added to the water. Only silicofluorides (a hazardous waste containing many toxic pollutants) are used to artificially fluoridate water, and studies have proven that they do not effectively prevent tooth decay, they only delay it. Silicofluorides never occur naturally in nature, and they are 85 times more toxic than natural occurring calcium fluoride. Therefore, the effect on the entire body will be different.
        This was proven in a study called, "Comparative Toxicity of Fluorine Compounds." After this study was completed, this statement was made: " ... this meant a daily intake of approximately 40 mg/kg of fluorine from sodium fluoride as compared with 3400 mg/kg from calcium fluoride. Therefore, from the standpoint of lethal concentrations and amount of fluorine necessary to cause growth inhibition, wide differences in toxicity of some of the compounds of fluoride were noted." In other words, industrial waste (sodium fluoride) is 85 times more toxic than natural calcium fluoride. Both of them contain fluoride, but they are totally different compounds.
        Calcium is a well-known antidote for fluoride poisoning. When an antidote accompanies a poison, it makes the poison far less toxic to the body. Soft waters to which fluoride is artificially added lack this calcium which is present in most waters that contain natural fluoride.
        "The claim that fluoridation is one of 'nature's experiments' is not valid because the salts put into the water supply, sodium fluoride or silicofluorides, are industrial products never found in natural water or in organisms. They are, furthermore, notoriously toxic, sufficiently so to be used as rat poison or insecticide. Calcium fluoride, on the other hand, which is the form commonly found in natural waters, is not toxic enough for such uses." — Dr. C. G. Dobbs, (Ph.D., A.R.C.S.) Bangor, Wales, England.

      • Rhys Rhys commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Putting fluoride in the water is illegal. Fluoride is treated as a drug to medicate against cavities. The flouride that is tipped into the water is not a registered drug and as a result the government is breaking the law. The people making the decision to medicate the population using fluoride should be taken to court and prosecuted. If a drug company did what the government are doing, they'd hauled over the coals for gross negligence.

        The is no real evidence that proves fluoride is effective when ingested. There are no studies being done by the government to explore the toxic effects on the population. They are happy to accept dated studies which by the EU's and York studies admission are flimsy.

      • holly theaholly thea commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Read in the Daily Mail online today that plans are being made to amend the law so that flouride can be added to drinking water across England and Wales. To come into effect later this month. This is extremely worrying as my area does not add flouride at the moment. It should be banned nationwide and I think a poll on this would be a very good idea. Anyone agree?

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        An enquiry into this and mercury in almalgam fillings would be most interesting.
        I'm of the understanding that it's possible a certain immunity would be built up due to the dilute nature of the flouride but nevertheless it needs bringing to the fore and addressing as a matter of urgency, as everyone reacts differently to different substances.

      • Veronica-Mae SoarVeronica-Mae Soar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Alan Whitman - you might not be able to afford bottled, but try affording filtered - we do.

        BTW - 5 pints of water a day is quite excessive, especially if you eat lots of vegetables as they contain mostly water.

      • falcon101falcon101 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I do not want fluoride in our drinking water, or my children drinking it.To add this poison to water to combat bad tooth decay records in any area is insane.
        If people want to ingest fluoride and ignore scientific evidence of the detrimental health effects (and that when you get it wrong, as they did in America, where too much fluoride caused tooth enamel to actually erode) then it should always and only be an individual choice, in toothpaste etc.
        Foods which are not so tooth friendly are going to be consumed. The promotion of better eating, good mouth maintenance (a responsibility of parents, educational bodies and Government) and also available affordable dental care (where's that gone) is really what is important...processed sugar is in so much of the big brand big money foods and addictive, but the artificial sweeteners touted as sugar free alternatives...most of these need to be avoided as well.
        While looking for information I came across the below statement - I have great concerns when a statement such as below is made:
        From the British Fluoridation Society website.....
        "The right to fluoride free water is not a basic civil right. ... It is not a right which affects the ability of individuals to make autonomous choices...
        In considering the ethics of fluoridation ... we should ask not are we entitled to impose fluoridation on unwilling people, but are the unwilling people entitled to impose the risks, damage and costs of failure to fluoridate on the community at large."
        - Professor John Harris, Centre for Social Ethics and Policy,
        The answer from Prof John Harris is a typical turn it around BS comment, so much used by politicians and people with dodgy agendas. I find this untrustworthy and totally unethical and rather worrying if this is the attitude from these people.
        For other comments also see:
        http://hampshireagainstfluoridation.blogspot.co.uk/

      • Alan WhithamAlan Whitham commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Almost every independent scientific study there has ever been on fluoride has concluded that it is a highly toxic drug which should on no account be ingested .Even 1ppm is too much .It seems really weird to me that we are still living with the threat of having this rat poison added to our drinking water , just because a couple of American scientists who were employed by the chemical industry, which wanted to get rid of tons of sodium fluoride , without having to pay for its disposal , said it would prevent children getting cavities . I am sure almost the entire population of Southampton would support a campaign to have fluoride free drinking water. Apart from the fact that it is carcinogenic there is serious doubt among scientists as to whether it does actually prevent cavities . Personally I drink 5 pints of tap water a day , I could not afford to buy that much bottled water.

      • TimTim commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        There are legislative changes being made in the Health and Social Care Bill, that relate to water Fluridation.
        If you would care to take a Serious Look at this.
        http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2010-2012/0221/cbill_2010-20120221_en_7.htm#pt1-pb7-l1g31

        This campaign really needs to be bumped to the top of the pile IMO for the above mentioned reasons.
        I am not 100% fluent in beaurocratanian (my grandmother could speak 5 languages though). Maybe someone here could translate for me.
        :-/

        I think the basic idea is that a Local Government could now, or maybe they could before(i never saw the /previous/ H+S care bill) tell the secretry of state,

        ""So yeah, do we need to poison people even more?...whadya think?...Do the ays to the right agree to it...and the ays to the left....Done...Law passed. Next on the agenda??""

        I've got a fairly good inclination thats what the bill is basically saying, what do you guys think?

      • TimTim commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        There are legislative changes being made in the Health and Social Care Bill, that relate to water Fluridation.
        If you would care to take a Serious Look at this.
        http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2010-2012/0221/cbill_2010-20120221_en_7.htm#pt1-pb7-l1g31

        This campaign really needs to be bumped to the top of the pile IMO for the above mentioned reasons.
        I am not 100% fluent in beaurocratanian (my grandmother could speak 5 languages though). Maybe someone here could translate for me.
        :-/

        I think the basic idea is that a Local Government could now, or maybe they could before(i never saw the /previous/ H+S care bill) tell the secretry of state,

        ""So yeah, do we need to poison people even more?...whadya think?...Do the ays to the right agree to it...and the ays to the left....Done...Law passed. Next on the agenda??""

        I've got a fairly good inclination thats what the bill is basically saying, what do you guys think?

      • TimTim commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        There are legislative changes being made in the Health and Social Care Bill, that relate to water Fluridation.
        If you would care to take a Serious Look at this.
        http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2010-2012/0221/cbill_2010-20120221_en_7.htm#pt1-pb7-l1g31

        This campaign really needs to be bumped to the top of the pile IMO for the above mentioned reasons.
        I am not 100% fluent in beaurocratanian (my grandmother could speak 5 languages though). Maybe someone here could translate for me.
        :-/

        I think the basic idea is that a Local Government could now, or maybe they could before(i never saw the /previous/ H+S care bill) tell the secretry of state,

        ""So yeah, do we need to poison people even more?...whadya think?...Do the ays to the right agree to it...and the ays to the left....Done...Law passed. Next on the agenda??""

        I've got a fairly good inclination thats what the bill is basically saying, what do you guys think?

      • drBobsterdrBobster commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Fluoridation of water is without doubt one of the most insidious pollutants we are subjected to. This affects not only people directly drinking the water but it contaminates food irrigated with it and the livestock we rely on. Fluoride is in most toothpastes already for those who wish to poison themselves. It is beyond me that the fluorides used in water can on the one hand be classed as industrial pollutants and on the other fed to the masses on the pretense of dubious dental benefit

      ← Previous 1 3

      Feedback and Knowledge Base