Primetime Report on Fluoride in Water - bad for formula feed babies?

jma

I'm not sure if this was mentionedon Prime Time, but Hot Press have published John Gormley's report on water fluoridation, along with his statements on why the report was suppressed by the Government. Here are the links:

http://www.hotpress.com/Water-Fluoridation-in-Ireland/politics/frontlines/Fluoride-The-Dil-Report-That-Was-Suppressed/10198737.html
http://www.hotpress.com/politics/frontlines/Gormley-says-Fluoride-Report-was-Suppressed/10176043.html

The document itself, can be downloaded as a PDF:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/167323404/The-Oireachtas-Joint-Irish-Houses-of-Parliament-Draft-report-on-Water-Fluoridation-in-Ireland?secret_password=syvmvagq062jpi6lc6f

pwurple

sari wrote: »

We could remove fluoride from the public water supply and save the country hundreds of thousands of € a year

Keeping people healthy saves the state far more than 100,000 euro a year.

sari

You don't seem to get it. Water fluoridation whether it is good for health or not is forced medication and that is completely unethical.
It is not easy to opt out of water fluoridation as you orgianally stated yet it is easy to opt in by taking fluoride toothpaste and a very cheap fluoride tablet.

More women breastfeeding would improve health and in the long run save the state millions on health care but we can't force women to breastfed because it not right, it's not ethical.

pwurple

Is someone holding you down and pouring tap-water down your neck or something?

There's no "forcing" about it. My husband doesn't drink water at all. He doesn't like water. He drinks milk (and booze!). I drink it, and after living in places where we couldn't, I'm very appreciative of it.

Does the bleach not bother people for some particular reason? Flouride isn't the only thing in the water you know. Not sure why there is a bandwagon going on taking out the helpful minerals, and not on the chlorine? People get so fixated on conspiracies.

sari

Do you agree that water is essential to life? That it is a basic human right?

If you believe these things then it's very hard to understand how you think that fluoride is not being forced on people.

We must have water to live, yet we can not get it easily without being medicated.

It is such simple logic

pwurple

Drinking quality water piped directly to your flushable modern toilet is not a "basic human right" by any stretch. That is a sense of entitlement gone completely bananas. Next you'll be telling me trampolines are a human right.

I'll leave you to your meaningless hyperbole about people being "forced" under their kitchen taps screaming in blind terror. The horror!

Hannibal Smith

sari wrote: »

Do you agree that water is essential to life? That it is a basic human right?

If you believe these things then it's very hard to understand how you think that fluoride is not being forced on people.

We must have water to live, yet we can not get it easily without being medicated.

It is such simple logic

You are right in everything you say Sari. At the moment we have to grin and bare it because the government are apparently doing us a favour by providing us with water...I wonder when we start paying taxes on it will we have more of a say in it...but then again it doesn't work that way with any other tax.

MrCreosote

Everyone knows the anti-fluoride hysteria is stirred up and funded by Big Dental and right-wing Think-tanks who want to keep the poor occupied and downtrodden.

Seriously, if you're that worried get a rainwater collecting system. Cheap and effective and used extensively overseas.

sari

Let's get something straight here, I'm not fixated on conspiracy theories as pwurple has implied. I have not mentioned or referenced any conspiracy theories, yet I am being falsely branded as a conspiracy theorist and I don't appreciate it, what are the chances of pwurple apologising for falsely accusing me even though I have not once mentioned any consiracy theories?

I do believe that fluoride is, in the right dose, beneficial to the health of ones teeth, which is why people should be able I access fluoride if they wish.

What I am concerned about is that there is no way to regulate or control how much any individual absorbs, which can lead to overdose and cause health problems. Overdose from fluoride and health problems occuring from this is not a conspiracy theory, it is the truth, and that is why we have daily limits on how much we should absorb safely. There is warnings on our toothpaste about swallowing to much, the advice given is to call poison control and seek medical help.

There is no way to control how much an individual absorbs, no way to limit how much we take and this is very dangerous.

If you want to mediate with fluoride then use fluoridated toothpaste and take a fluoride supplement, then we won't have any worries about overdose, health concerns or ethical issues

iguana

pwurple wrote: »

Iguana, your deciduous teeth not falling out hasn't much to do with them being healthy or not. They don't rot out of the heads of children normally! It is healthy deciduous teeth that the tooth fairy takes away from under pillows.

It most certainly does when the tooth has lasted 34 years (and counting) with no dental intervention or problems.

Akrasia

sari wrote: »

Let's get something straight here, I'm not fixated on conspiracy theories as pwurple has implied. I have not mentioned or referenced any conspiracy theories, yet I am being falsely branded as a conspiracy theorist and I don't appreciate it, what are the chances of pwurple apologising for falsely accusing me even though I have not once mentioned any consiracy theories?

I do believe that fluoride is, in the right dose, beneficial to the health of ones teeth, which is why people should be able I access fluoride if they wish.

What I am concerned about is that there is no way to regulate or control how much any individual absorbs, which can lead to overdose and cause health problems. Overdose from fluoride and health problems occuring from this is not a conspiracy theory, it is the truth, and that is why we have daily limits on how much we should absorb safely. There is warnings on our toothpaste about swallowing to much, the advice given is to call poison control and seek medical help.

There is no way to control how much an individual absorbs, no way to limit how much we take and this is very dangerous.

If you want to mediate with fluoride then use fluoridated toothpaste and take a fluoride supplement, then we won't have any worries about overdose, health concerns or ethical issues

There are a lot of public health measures out there that we could all benefit from.

Without doubt, the vaccination program has saved countless lives and prevented countless lives from being destroyed by some of those awful diseases like smallpox, polio, measles etc
The Smallpox vaccine was given as a mandatory medication in many places and aren't we all incredibly lucky that this disease has been wiped out?

2 billion people are iodine deficient around the world. This is a condition that can cause mental retardation in developing babies. Some places put Iodine into table salt to reduce this deficiency in the public. I would support this.

The levels of fluoride added to irish water has been extensively studied and tested and it has been found to be safe. The public health benefits outweigh the risks (which are extremely low)

sari

Akrasia wrote: »

The levels of fluoride added to irish water has been extensively studied and tested and it has been found to be safe. The public health benefits outweigh the risks (which are extremely low)

Please explain how it is possible to control how much fluoride each individual is absorbing?

jma

pwurple wrote: »

Keeping people healthy saves the state far more than 100,000 euro a year.

Fluoridation does not keep us healthy. Studies show that fluoridation has little to no impact on oral health. Ireland is one of just a small number of countries that fluoridate their water. Most EU countries have stopped water fluoridation, and there has been no significant rise in caries in those countries; the opposite in fact.

Also, water flouridation does not cost 100k per year; it costs over 4m.

pwurple wrote: »

Is someone holding you down and pouring tap-water down your neck or something?

There's no "forcing" about it. My husband doesn't drink water at all. He doesn't like water. He drinks milk (and booze!). I drink it, and after living in places where we couldn't, I'm very appreciative of it.

Does the bleach not bother people for some particular reason? Flouride isn't the only thing in the water you know. Not sure why there is a bandwagon going on taking out the helpful minerals, and not on the chlorine? People get so fixated on conspiracies.

With all due respect, it seems like you're being naive. Please see my previous post. Everyone drinks water in some form. It is necessary for life. What do you think is the main ingredient in "booze"? Beer contains as much as 95% water. If it's bottled in Ireland, there will be fluoride in it. It's in the food, tea, coffee, infant formula, fizzy drinks, and it's also absorbed through the skin.

pwurple wrote: »

Drinking quality water piped directly to your flushable modern toilet is not a "basic human right" by any stretch. That is a sense of entitlement gone completely bananas. Next you'll be telling me trampolines are a human right.

I'll leave you to your meaningless hyperbole about people being "forced" under their kitchen taps screaming in blind terror. The horror!

Formal international human rights law acknowledges that water and sanitation is a human right. If you don't trust this as a fact, you may read the following document.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/ga10967.doc.htm

MrCreosote wrote: »

Everyone knows the anti-fluoride hysteria is stirred up and funded by Big Dental and right-wing Think-tanks who want to keep the poor occupied and downtrodden.

Seriously, if you're that worried get a rainwater collecting system. Cheap and effective and used extensively overseas.

This, by definition, is a conspiracy theory, which is something, I think, no one wants to discuss here.

A rainwater collecting system may be a good idea, but it's not the answer to the water fluoridation issue.

MrCreosote

sari wrote: »

Let's get something straight here, I'm not fixated on conspiracy theories as pwurple has implied. I have not mentioned or referenced any conspiracy theories, yet I am being falsely branded as a conspiracy theorist and I don't appreciate it, what are the chances of pwurple apologising for falsely accusing me even though I have not once mentioned any consiracy theories?

I do believe that fluoride is, in the right dose, beneficial to the health of ones teeth, which is why people should be able I access fluoride if they wish.

What I am concerned about is that there is no way to regulate or control how much any individual absorbs, which can lead to overdose and cause health problems. Overdose from fluoride and health problems occuring from this is not a conspiracy theory, it is the truth, and that is why we have daily limits on how much we should absorb safely. There is warnings on our toothpaste about swallowing to much, the advice given is to call poison control and seek medical help.

There is no way to control how much an individual absorbs, no way to limit how much we take and this is very dangerous.

If you want to mediate with fluoride then use fluoridated toothpaste and take a fluoride supplement, then we won't have any worries about overdose, health concerns or ethical issues

Maybe you haven't directly mentioned conspiracy theories, but you've deliberately fudged the issues. Suggesting that fluoride overdose is possible in Ireland through drinking water is rubbish (it is possible of course if you swallow enough toothpaste). Suggesting that you absorb any meaningful amount of fluoride though your skin when having a shower in fluoridated water is crossing the line to wacky theories IMO.

There is a way to control what you take - yes it's annoying and expensive, but if it's that important to you (and it isn't to most people) then it can easily be done. It's not the government's responsibility to bend over to every crackpot theory.

Seems to me that the worst claim that can be levelled at fluoridation is that it is not much use for most people. This isn't the case for poorer/marginalised members in society, but you know, who gives a sh*t about them, eh?

iguana

MrCreosote wrote: »

This isn't the case for poorer/marginalised members in society, but you know, who gives a sh*t about them, eh?

Are you actually claiming that there are people in this country who can't afford €3 a year on toothpaste? Seriously?

MrCreosote

iguana wrote: »

Are you actually claiming that there are people in this country who can't afford €3 a year on toothpaste? Seriously?

No. I'm claiming that there are people in this country who don't brush their teeth twice a day with €3 toothpaste. Affording it and using it are two different things.

January

This thread, while interesting, is just turning into a mud slinging match between certain posters, so lets get back onto the discussion of fluoride and formula fed babies or I'll be forced to lock it.

Orion

pwurple wrote: »

I'll leave you to your meaningless hyperbole about people being "forced" under their kitchen taps screaming in blind terror. The horror!

That's quite enough of that. Sarcasm is unnecessary as is your strawman argument from earlier in the thread - "Water has been flouridated here since 1957, and the population's life expectancy has increased over that time, not decreased."

Be nice or be elsewhere.

Treora

MrCreosote wrote: »

No. I'm claiming that there are people in this country who don't brush their teeth twice a day with €3 toothpaste. Affording it and using it are two different things.

So you didn't read any of the other threads on fluoride. In simple terms the UCC showed in 2002 that DMFT in 15 year olds was 2.6. The national average at the time was 1.1+. Sweden had .85. Sweden now has .7 and no one dare tests Ireland because once you have DMFT of 2.6 in a population that is now 26 years old there is no way to spin the stats.

We could save millions (the figure is closer to €40M than €4M) by copying the Swedes as they have habitualised early childhood oral hygiene education. One school year when children are 5, no toothpaste as it is for parental supervision only, where the teacher puts on a video and the class brushes their teeth together with water after eating. Getting the technique right and normalising the frequency is important. The teenagers get refresher courses and the adults get a national oral hygiene week (this is done in many, many other countries).

Going from 2.6 to .7 in a generation would be amazing. There is link after link to the latest research like Dr Karin Jacob's on the other threads.

And water fluoridation arrived in 1964 in Dublin and the rest of the country by 1967, which was the exact same time that fluoridated toothpaste became widely available. The two are often conflated, the brushing did 98% of the work and the surface hardening by fluoride that reduced some of the harm caused by acidic drinks. The ADA say we need .185ml of toothpaste with 1450ppm of a fluoride compound. Water fluoridation provides 2 litres a day at .7ppm with 5% ending up in saliva. All the stuff on the inside is just that inside the dentine. It does not affect the surface layer. The difference is a 100:1 ratio of the amount the ADA says we need and the amount that water fluoridation can provide. It is homeopathic, or pointless on a benefit level. We excrete 50% and 45% is absorbed into our body, what its affects are differ from person to person and interest group to interest group.

The big thing is that should a foetus be subject to that amount of fluoride! People always say that it did me no harm, well show me the health statistics across Europe and then talk. The only thing I know that we are the best in the world at the moment is debt at a per capita level, be it personal or organisational or state.

Human teeth are made of calcium and phosphate and never evolved to handle fluoride. There is plenty in the environment, but we never evolved to have it naturally in our teeth. Does that no strike people as odd. We did evolve to cope with virii and did develop an immune system, but no fluoride.

Well if you don't want it you can tell your councillors when they call for your vote next year. It will have no effect as they have no authority and will not be listened to by their parliamentry party for at least two election cycles. Or you can seek out your MEP candidates and ask them to reduce the amount of added fluoride allowed in the EU drinking water directive. Or get an EU petition going, this is the best shot. Don't waste your time with an Irish petition.

jh79

Fluoride has existed in water long before there were people on this planet. This fluoride is no different than that present in our water.

The question is whether this level is safe it is not important where it comes from. Northern Ireland has 0.3ppm without fluoridation and we have 0.7ppm with fluoridation there is absolutely no evidence that either concentrations are anything other than completely safe.

sari

Interesting letter to all EU Ambassadors http://www.eutimes.net/2011/06/eu-ambassadors-in-ireland-warned-that-tap-water-is-not-safe-for-baby-bottles/