SOUTHAMPTON PCT CLAIMS CRITICISED BY ADVERTISING STANDARDS AUTHORITY
Southampton PCT has now been instructed by the Advertising Standards Authority to remove all references from its published material to one of the claims made during the water fluoridation consultation.
This follows official complaints made by three members of Hampshire Against Fluoridation and UK Councils Against Fluoridation about misleading claims in advertisements by the PCT to promote water fluoridation.
During the consultation, the PCT claimed in their advertisements that "By topping it up to one part of fluoride per one million parts of water, it would be possible to make a major difference to the teeth of adults and children locally, and for future generations"
consult with the CAP Copy Advice team on future claims relating to fluoride.
HAF Chairman Stephen Peckham said "We have always argued that the PCT and SHA made exaggerated claims about water fluoridation
The ASA’s scientific experts ruled that there was no good quality evidence to support this statement. Consequently, the PCT have agreed not to repeat these claims and have also agreed to that were not based on good evidence. The fact that the PCT have now had to promise the ASA not to repeat these statements about making a major difference to adults removes one of the key arguments made by the PCT and SHA for imposing the scheme."
During the consultation PCT staff repeatedly said that water fluoridation would help "everyone" and the SHA in its consultation document also stated that water fluoridation benefits adults - despite the lack of evidence to support such statements.
Stephen Peckham added "It is likely that many people were influenced by these claims during the consultation and may have given support to the scheme thinking it would benefit them. The truth is that there are no such benefits. The fact that the PCT willingly withdrew this claim must also raise serious questions about other statements they made to promote water fluoridation to local people."
Following the PCT’s assurance not to repeat this claim, the ASA have dropped this particular clause from their final ruling which is published today (21 April 2010).
HAF Chairman: Stephen Peckham.
Brian Jackson writes,
Full marks and congratulations go out to HAF and to UKCAF for challenging the PCT statements. It is also probably worth checking carefully any other statements from your local PCT or SHA for similar gaffs. and then referring them to the findings by the ASA. The menace of fluoride although not yet destroyed is now becoming increasingly remote.
Open Letter on the British Dental Association Manifesto from John Spottiswoode
Dear Madam,
I received the British Dental Association letter to Candidates for the General Election, forwarded from Green Party Headquarters. I need to make it clear to you that I cannot support your manifesto, particularly point 5 on the promotion of fluoride. In fact I very strongly oppose the use of fluoride as it is:
Ineffective (the supposed benefits are more than outweighed by the dis-benefits, even if the flawed and biased data for five year olds is to be accepted);
Unethical (it is wrong to force everyone to take 'medication' via their tap water);
Unsafe (there is a mass of peer-reviewed and published scientific data giving grave concerns over the health effects of fluoride
Uneconomic (the supposed savings from fewer fillings is more than outweighed by the costs of delivery and the 'externality' costs of dental fluorosis. Even assuming no more serious side effects for which there is a mass of evidence.)
The addition of fluoride to the water supply has been a massive local issue in Southampton and after a thoroughly disgraceful and biased Public Consultation the population were not fooled and have voted repeatedly AGAINST adding fluoride. Every serious candidate in the parliamentary elections in Southampton now opposes the introduction of fluoride against the wishes of the population.
The BDA need to look at the science with a properly open mind and realise that fluoride affects much more than the teeth. Introducing it to the water supply leads to systemic fluoride poisoning. The data on benefits to five year old children's teeth is biased as in fact that result comes from the systemic poisoning of our children, as those in fluoridated areas have their teeth erupt around a year later (more than 50 studies have shown this).
With teeth erupting later it means that the teeth have been exposed for less time, meaning fewer cavities. If you look at the difference later in life there is NO statistically significant difference in cavities (if you want to quote to me the recent meta-study please read it properly before misinterpreting the findings).
So I call on the BDA to do some proper scientific homework and stop promoting fluoride. I will certainly oppose water fluoridation at this election and wherever I can.
Yours faithfully,
John Spottiswoode, BSc, BA, PMP
Green Party Candidate for Southampton Itchen.
From: Peter Poole, Brighton at Brighton FoE
Following my mention of candidates' election surveys, I received the following note by mail this week. I hope it might be helpful in lobbying other Labour candidates:
Dear Mr. Poole,
Thank you for taking the trouble to return one of my survey forms the contents of which I always read and are very useful to me in gauging local people's views on a variety of issues.
Personally I do not believe that Fluoridation will be put forward as a possibility in Brighton and Hove and it is clear to me that this is an area where people do not want it. I would support local residents in their opposition, if it is put forward for this area. Yours sincerely,
Simon Burgess
Labour & Co-operative Party candidate
for Brighton & Kemptown & Peacehaven
PLEASE KEEP SENDING ANY REPLIES YOU RECEIVE FROM POLITICIANS AND WANNABEES TO THIS ADDRESS. fluoride@foe.co.uk SO WE CAN PUBLISH THEM. ..... MANY THANKS.
Friends in Most High Places
It was very good to see that God apparently joined in the fight against fluoridation over the last week or so. He demonstrated that widespread fluoridation was not as advertised and dumped a lot of it across Europe using the Icelandic volcano which only a madmen would try to spell correctly let alone pronouce. Foreign Toxicologists, Epidemiologists and Vulcanologists lined up in the Foreign press and media (but of course not the British Media) to explain the real dangers from the "deadly" ash cloud containing very high dozes of fluoride. This rather took the gloss off the usual lies and misinformation put out by the fluoridistas about how "safe and effective" fluoride really is. Back into your swamp you guys unless you want a good slapping which i think the British electorate are going to give you anyway. And once again we give thanks parises to the Big Man or Woman, up there at Heaven.com for the help and Pelease don't let the other bigger Volcano off its lead. Many of us still remember just how bad it got last time that happened as you can see at this url ....
