Dublin City Council votes against water fluoridation

The councillor admitted the issue is a “quagmire” but said that he has been reading up on it over the past few years. He said that the council is “calling on the Government to do something here – the onus is on the Government to do something”.

He added that Ireland is only one of eight countries in the world that fluoridates its water.

“There’s a lot of questions to be answered,” he said. “My argument is it’s universal medication, it’s one size fits all, but even the World Health Organisation, which recommends fluoride, recommends it – but only where intake of fluoride is known.”

He argued it would be impossible to know exactly how much fluoride each individual in Ireland uses.

What nonsense. The intake (not use) of fluoride in Ireland is well known - the WHO's concern is excessive ingestion of fluoride - there's no naturally high-fluoride water sources in Ireland, and local authorities (and Irish Water when they take over) constantly measure fluoride levels in public water. Unless the councillor believes there's been an outbreak of toothpaste eating, there's no mystery on fluoride intake nationally.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Low fat water.

Its a tokenistic vote.
However I wouldn't weep if fluoride was indeed removed.

Almost all of Europe seem to be surviving.
I reckon we would to.

We'd probably do as well as they do in the North. Which is to say; slightly higher levels of tooth decay.

It's the misinformed faux 'dangers' that annoy me about the anti-fluoridation debate.

Aren't DCC under the control of SF now ?

It's their agenda to call on the Govt. to do all sorts of stuff that the Govt. are not likely to do.

"Bongalongherb wrote:

A large amount of Irish citizens do not want their water treated/medicated with fluoride. They want to have a choice to be able to drink water without the flouride.

Seems reasonable.

Leave the water unflouridated & issue packs of delicious sodium fluorosilicate to those who want it.

The nanny-staters get their fluoride, the tinfoil hatters live without the governments mind control chemical.

Everybody wins!

alastair wrote: »

The objective measurements of tooth decay difference between here and NI are a bit more than just opinion. Belt and braces produces better outcomes than belt or brace alone.

And link to which councillors voted which way? Might make an interesting read

nice_guy80 wrote: »

no need for poison in the water

Other than protecting against tooth decay.

desertcircus wrote: »

If there's a reason for not wanting it that isn't rooted in junk science, I'm all ears.

In that case lets ban all religion. I'm an atheist but I don't think we should FORCE everyone to become one based on science.

So the research is that it is good for your teeth?

I think it should be left up to the individual whether they want the government's help on this one:



I go out of my way to buy non fluoridated water. My choice.

Cianmcliam wrote: »

Here's the only relevant comparison for Ireland:


You will see differences in effects depending on the dental health system, culture and eating habits of different countries.
Ireland has one of the highest rates of children snacking on sweets, chocolate and fizzy drinks in the EU. In some countries on that chart it is a lot more rare. That means other countries will not see the large benefit Ireland enjoys because their diet is far less challenging to dental health.

There are numerous studies that suggest that there are many negatives on the use of fluoride in water.

You appear to be fully satisfied that it is ok and only beneficial.

I think you are entitled to this belief but why should I have to avoid drinking tap water because of my belief?

Should we ban fizzy sweets also? Maybe we should get everyone drinking diet coke instead...I mean that has been approved as safe and has no sugar.

I think the issue is the fact that we don't have the option of not having fluoride in the water other than purchasing in a supermarket.

oscarBravo wrote: »

None. But then, we're talking about basically the same mentality that believes there's a link between vaccination and autism.

Which vaccination do you mean?

How well did the Greeks do with the Spanish Flu vaccination compared to the rest of the world after WW1?

Lockstep wrote: »

I wouldn't lump the Rosie Hackett bridge in with those other head-the-balls.

She was a fairly impressive trade unionist and republican who fought in the Easter Rising but remains fairly obscure. IIRC that was one of the reasons they wanted the bridge named after her as she was an impressive woman who often gets overlooked.

Sure, and I would not disparage her and I get why it's important to better representation of Women in nameplaces. What I am talking to is how a very small minority view got traction to put her in as opposed to whether it was a good idea or not. If the proposed names had gone to the public in Dublin City or indeed the TD's you would have gotten a very different nomination. It's a series of actions which show a very small minority are controlling or have disproportionate influence in the chamber. TBH most voters think the city manager runs the show (partly true) so don't bother, letting small numbers of activist get in based on tiny numbers of votes and single issues. This will lead to issues for the bigger parties down the road if they don't address it.

Cianmcliam wrote: »

See the chart above for Ireland's dental health in fluoridated vs non-fluoridated areas. Treating teeth after they have decayed is much more expensive and can have lots of negative effects beyond the economic one.

Fluoridation saves money and reduces suffering and pain associated with cavities and extractions. The arguments against it are based on atrociously bad 'science' and plain faced scaremongering.

I'm not quite sure what that chart is supposed to represent, where did you find the data for it?

At the end of the day the state had to cover dental care costs for the less well off in society.

assuming the chart posted is correct then I'd imagine the measure pays for itself.