Help - our Government really seems intent on harming us!

Here we go again. They want to poison us all with Fluoride now. Despite so much evidence existing already for the damaging results - and lack of effectiveness - of this action.

wddty.com/fluoride-in-uk-s-...

They cannot be that stupid can they?? It must be for more sinister reasons.

articles.mercola.com/sites/...

rense.com/general57/FLUR.HTM

expletive expletive expletive...................

OOS

18 Replies

oldestnewest
  • I do not wish to sign up to WDDTY, and cannot read the article without doing so.

    Could you possibly let us have a sentence or two to summarise the story?

  • Hi helvella - I thought the link brought up this text from todays WDDT email?

    'The fluoridation of the UK’s public water supply has taken a step closer—even though it has been rejected in several European countries and 50 American cities.

    Regional health authorities are being given powers to determine whether to introduce fluoride to the local water supply. In amendments to the Water Bill, the responsibility shifts from the local water companies, most of which have been reticent to add fluoride.

    The government is passing the powers to the health authorities because it wants to see more regions of the UK fluoridated. Government experts maintain that fluoride reduces tooth decay, especially in children living in poorer areas.

    They have rejected the concerns of opponents of fluoride, who have maintained the chemical might cause cancer, Down’s syndrome and osteoporosis. Instead, they can drink bottled water or filter their tap water, says health minister Hazel Blears.'

    OOS

  • What it does is bring this up:

    Fluoride in UK’s public water likely to happen

    email to friend Printer friendly

    23 January 2013

    The fluoridation of the UK’s public water supply has taken a step closer—even though it has been rejected in several European countries and 50 American cities.

    Regional health authorities are being given powers to determine whether to introduce fluoride to the local water supply. In amendments to the Water Bill, the responsibility shifts from the local water companies, most of which have been reticent to add fluoride.

    The government is passing the powers to the......

    You’re a click away from some of the best health information on the Web

    If you are already a member please login

    We ask everyone to join the WDDTY site first. It’s free to see the News and Community items – but you might want to consider our other options, too.

    Continue

    So it is obvious what the subject is, but nothing else. Nor what is happening for it to be news today. I thought the powers were already vested in the health people - and that is why Southampton had fluoride added? But I could so easily be wrong.

  • This is the latest I found looking just now.

    google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j...

    The Government proposes to change the decision-making process for fluoridation schemes. Paul Burstow MP for the Government said that clauses in the Health and Social Care Bill did not intend to make new fluoridation schemes more or less likely. He explained the clauses would transfer responsibility for consulting and deciding on schemes from strategic health authorities to local authorities, “putting in place a fair and practical way to discharge the function once the strategic health authorities are abolished”. He said that this “would make decisions on fluoridation more democratically accountable.”

    The Bill also includes powers for the Government to make regulations on the criteria which local authorities should apply in determining whether to start or continue a fluoridation scheme. These regulations could provide for voting on a fluoridation proposal.41 The Government said that it plans to hold a consultation on the content of these regulations before they are laid before Parliament.

  • Much more detail is available here:

    publications.parliament.uk/...

    But, to be honest, I about fell asleep trying to read it, let alone understand it.

    There might be hope though, all fluoridation schemes have a cost and, in the present climate, that might be enough to make them unpopular with local authorities, health people, government. At least for a while.

  • Let us hope so.

  • There's something strange here because Hazel Blears is not a health minster, not even a shadow health minister, so that quote is several years old from when Labour was in power. I can't think why it has been mentioned now unless to ridicule all MPs and their comments. Surely someone in parliament has said something more up to date on the subject than this.

  • Sorry those deletions are mine, I was trying to amend my comment immediately underneath OUTOFSINC's post quoting from WDDTY in turn quoting from Hazel Blears, then the amended comment appeared further down the thread so I tried to move it up, but couldn't!

  • Yes - looks like your right Framboise.

    They are quoting old news as though it's current.

    still chills me to contemplate having it in my water supply however.

    OOS

  • Not read the article either for the same reason as Rod

    But if it that they are going to add fluoride to all water supply then I'm not going to be too happy about it.

    I spent last year travelling a lot between the west coast of Scotland and Cheshire. I grew up and lived on the west coast all my life and there is fluoride added to the water there, since I started travelling, I noticed that I felt much better when in Cheshire, and went down hill again every time I went back to Scotland. While the weather may have been partly the cause, Scotland being colder and damper, I was the same during the summer months, I ate the same food and the only other difference was the water supply, which we decided had to be a contributing factor to my fluctuating health, having ruled out everything else. The difference in my health was really noticeable between the two countries and helped me make the decision to give up everything I had and move down here permanently. (which in all likelihood I would have done anyway but maybe not quite so soon)

  • Have just checked and seen that none of Scotlands water supplies has added fluoride.

    Jo xx

  • Yes - fedupsusie.

    I'm Irish, and have many times thought about moving back to where almost all my relatives still live. However, when I discovered that they were forcing fluoridated water on the population, I was less enthusiastic about this plan.

    Glad you have moved to were you feel better.

    OOS

  • It has always been the case that if the local health authority ask for the water supply to be fluoridated then the water company HAS to comply. It has nothing to do with government policy.

  • In 2003, the Government introduced provisions in the Water Act 2003 to allow strategic health authorities to require water companies to fluoridate water, after consultation with the local population. Previously they could make a request but the water companies did not have to accede to this request. (The legislation relating to fluoridation is set out in Library Standard Note 3135 Fluoridation: Legislation).

  • In 2003, the Government introduced provisions in the Water Act 2003 to allow strategic health authorities to require water companies to fluoridate water, after consultation with the local population. Previously they could make a request but the water companies did not have to accede to this request. (The legislation relating to fluoridation is set out in Library Standard Note 3135 Fluoridation: Legislation).

  • If flouride is so dangerous, then why don`t people who use it in toothpaste get ill?

  • Are you sure that they don't?

    thyroid.about.com/cs/toxicc...

    .....Some advocates believe that the truth about fluoride does not reach the public easily because fluoride, produced as a toxic waste byproduct of many types of heavy industry - such as aluminum, steel, fertilizer, glass, cement and other industries -- must be disposed of somewhere. If it's not used as an additive to water, manufacturers would have to pay millions of dollars to dispose of it properly, so the pressure to keep fluoride listed as a healthy additive to water-and not as an environmental toxin that requires costly disposal - is great and political pressures to keep fluoride in the drinking water is strong.

  • Can't see them changing the rules after 60 years.

You may also like...