Flouride to be added to Northern Ireland water

zenno

Yeah, I thought I was in humanities thread lol. I was wondering why this whole thread was so serious. Now i'm waiting for someone to say..Blast it with piss.

opinion guy

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/eh41_1.pdf

Actually had another look at this. Its a systematic review of largely ecological levels studies. No meta-analysis. I.e. its an opinion piece on a collection of opinoin pieces. i.e. beyond worthless.

Deleted User wrote: »

Probably because they don't exist.

Did you look ?
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/brain/index.aspx#human
Ddin't take much googling.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=fluoride%20iq
Nor much pubmeding
Here have a meta-analysis:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18695947

Honestly, I'm finding it hard to see a difference between the anti-flouridation crowd and the anti-vaccination crowd. Both like to make a big song and dance over a tiny minority of research published in scarcely known journals (or not published at all) while completley ignoring the towering mountain of evidence from reputable, peer reviewed publications that completley debunk their claims.

I'm neither anti-vaccine nor anti-fluoride. I mean I told you I wasn't decided on this issue. What 'towering mountain of evidence' ? I'm waiting for you to post credible evidence on its safety. I am the undecided. Convince me. Not a systemetic review of ecological studies. Large N, Individualised randomised controlled trials and substantial meta-analyses only please.

zenno

It is a standard medical ethic that no person should be forced to take medicine without their consent. However, the government’s Medicines Control Agency considers that fluoridated drinking water is not a medicine. But of course it is! – it’s a substance intended to promote bodily change supposedly to improve an aspect of health.
It is a matter of human rights that people should have control over their own bodies especially where harmful substances are concerned. It is possible that water fluoridation could be challenged under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 2000.

My name is URL

zenno wrote: »

It is a standard medical ethic that no person should be forced to take medicine without their consent. However, the government’s Medicines Control Agency considers that fluoridated drinking water is not a medicine. But of course it is! – it’s a substance intended to promote bodily change supposedly to improve an aspect of health.
It is a matter of human rights that people should have control over their own bodies especially where harmful substances are concerned. It is possible that water fluoridation could be challenged under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 2000.

It was actually tested in court in the 60's

In Ryan v. Attorney General (1965), the Supreme Court of Ireland held that water fluoridation did not infringe the plaintiff's right to bodily integrity. However, the court found that such a right to bodily integrity did exist*, despite the fact that it was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of Ireland, thus establishing the doctrine of unenumerated rights in Irish constitutional law.

http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IESC/1965/1.html

*Article 40 of the Irish Constitution states that you have a right not to have your body or person interfered with.

I'm certain that it could be further scrutinised. I'd love to hear whether the proponents of fluoridation accept whether or not it's a form of medication.

edit - It may also be testable under the UN's (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) which in article 7 states that "In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation".

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm

chasm

Summary Report: Human toxicity, Environmental impact and legal implications on water fluoridation (Feb 2012) Declan Waugh:
http://www.enviro.ie/Summary_Report_Fluoridation.pdf

I have always been against fluoridation of water, and after reading this report the other day, that has not changed. Here's a few quotes from it:

"One central and astonishing fact that has been documented repeatedly by every assessment to date is that the products used for water fluoridation have never been tested for safety on humans nor the environment."

"Terminology: Fluoride: Any combination of fluorine with another element or chemical group of elements. Thus, the addition of fluorides to drinking water can indicate the addition of a large number of chemical agents...H2SiF6, (which is the product used in Ireland), a compound that contains both fluorine and silicon.

"Fluoride is a List ii substance under the Council Directive 80/68/EEC relating to the prevention of discharges of certain toxic, persistent and bioaccumulable substances into groundwater.
Fluoride is listed as an undesirable substance in Annex 1 of Directive 80/778/EEC relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption."