Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

What do you think of water fluoridation, should it be stopped?

  • 28-07-2015 6:40am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭


    Near the end of 2014, Ireland was the only nation in the world with a nationwide mandate for water fluoridation.[2][51][52]

    The majority of drinking water is fluoridated. Around 2012, 3.25 million people received artificially-fluoridated water.[4] 71% of the population in 2002 resided in fluoridated communities.[53] The fluoridation agent used is hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFSA; H2SiF6).[54] In a 2002 public survey, 45% of respondents expressed some concern about fluoridation.[55]

    In 1957, the Department of Health established a Fluorine Consultative Council which recommended fluoridation at 1.0 ppm of public water supplies, then accessed by ~50% of the population.[56] This was felt to be a much cheaper way of improving the quality of children's teeth than employing more dentists.[57] The ethical approval for this was given by the "Guild of Saints Luke, Cosmas and Damian", established by Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, John Charles McQuaid.[56] This led to the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act 1960, which mandated compulsory fluoridation by local authorities.[57][58] The statutory instruments made in 1962–65 under the 1960 Act were separate for each local authority, setting the level of fluoride in drinking water to 0.8–1.0 ppm.[59][60] The current regulations date from 2007, and set the level to 0.6–0.8 ppm, with a target value of 0.7 ppm.[61]

    Implementation of fluoridation was held up by preliminary dental surveying and water testing,[62] and a court case, Ryan v. Attorney General.[63] In 1965, the Supreme Court rejected Gladys Ryan's claim that the Act violated the Constitution of Ireland's guarantee of the right to bodily integrity.[63][64] By 1965, Greater Dublin's water was fluoridated; by 1973, other urban centers were.[65] Studies from the late 1970s to mid 1990s showed a higher decrease in (and lower incidence of) dental decay in school children living in areas where water was fluoridated than in areas where water was not fluoridated.[66]

    A private member's bill to end fluoridation was defeated in the Dáil on 12 November 2013.[67][68] It was supported by Sinn Féin and some of the technical group and opposed by the Fine Gael-Labour government and Fianna Fáil.[68][69][70]

    Recently there is much local opposition to the national fluoridation mandate. Early in 2014, Cork County Council and Laois County Council passed motions for the cessation of water fluoridation. In Autumn 2014, Cork City Council, Dublin City Council,[51][52] and Kerry County Council passed similar motions.[51]


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,417 ✭✭✭ToddyDoody


    Worst thing that ever happened, ever. (this thread)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Massimo Cassagrande


    Bad as flouride is, aluminium sulphate is worse, and they happily use that to clarify the water at treatment plants. And then wonder why Alzheimers is so rampant. Lead pipes? Meh, there's more metal in the water than just lead.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,844 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    If they want to help the dental situation of the country, they should pump the money into better education and resources in terms of healthier eating and lifestyle, rather than pumping fluoride through our water. They should be aiming to get the water as pure as possible and leave it up to the individual what to do in terms of fluoride protection after that.

    With all these arguments, stats and figures from those opposing water fluoridation, it's hard not to be concerned. I've never really seen anyone who's passionately "pro" fluoridation, more-so just folks who argue against the concerns of the anti fluoridation groups on a scientific and research basis.

    I don't think anyone but those with vested interests in fluoridation will be negatively impacted by the removal of it from the water supply so why not just do it? As a regular observer and citizen, the only reason I can see is there's some people making money from this.

    I'd have absolutely no qualms paying the water charges if I knew the water being supplied was much purer including free of fluoride. The convenience of having fresh, clean drinking water pumped directly to my kitchen taps which I can use and rehydrate with such ease, would be well worth the cost that's currently being charged for what is a polluted, health concerning supply.

    And the worst part is I still drink litres upon litres of tap water every week just out of convenience.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭Riverireland


    I was surprised to see that ireland seems to be the most flouride country in the world. I've taken to drinking only bottled water personally. Seeing as we are now paying for water should we not have a choice of flouride or non flouride?

    What is the cost of adding flouride to the water system per annum or where can that information be accessed?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,349 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    I've still to see any comprehensive and convincing evidence from a reputable source that it's a bad thing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,592 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Don't drink the stuff for a number of reasons,fluoride is the least of them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭Riverireland


    I've still to see any comprehensive and convincing evidence from a reputable source that it's a bad thing.

    I've been looking at the implications and can't find any evidence that it is a good thing. Would like some information on the financials, how much is being spent and who it's going to. Also verification on the levels in our water.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,844 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    I've still to see any comprehensive and convincing evidence from a reputable source that it's a bad thing.

    I've seen so many similar responses from these discussions. The very idea of adding fluoride, or anything for that matter, to natures purest and most essential resource at the source (before it exits the kitchen tap) is absurd. We've managed a technology that allows us to harness rain water and supply it country wide to almost every household, why interfere with it further? Why wait for something to be proven bad when the very idea of it doesn't sit well with so many?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    What is the cost of adding flouride to the water system per annum or where can that information be accessed?

    Other countries actually pay us to take their waste flouride from them and then we go and add that stuff into our drinking water. They must all be laughing at us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,174 ✭✭✭✭Captain Chaos


    I've still to see any comprehensive and convincing evidence from a reputable source that it's a bad thing.

    Why does no other country in the EU or or most countries do it, when they have excess of the stuff, they consider it a waste product and they sell it to us. That tells you something.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,799 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    I've been looking at the implications and can't find any evidence that it is a good thing. Would like some information on the financials, how much is being spent and who it's going to. Also verification on the levels in our water.

    The costs both financial and in terms of negative health effects, are negligable

    The evidence that flouridation protects against dental caries is overwhelming
    the data available to date strongly support the continuation of the
    current water fluoridation policies. The epidemiological evidence that fluoride
    protects against dental caries is overwhelming. Concerns about adverse effects other than dental fluorosis have not been substantiated.
    http://www.dentalhealth.ie/download/pdf/waterfluoridation.pdf

    If you're genuinely concerned about this issue, the solution is to read better sources on the internet.
    Natural news is not a reliable source for anything and neither are the millions of other crackpot conspiracy or pseudo science websites


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,799 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Why does no other country in the EU or or most countries do it, when they have excess of the stuff, they consider it a waste product and they sell it to us. That tells you something.

    most countries have flouride supplementation programs through water, salt or milk

    Flouride is not a bogeyman


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,844 ✭✭✭✭cormie


    Akrasia wrote: »
    The costs both financial and in terms of negative health effects, are negligable

    The evidence that flouridation protects against dental caries is overwhelming

    And they are so concerned about our dental health, they let coca cola sponsor what is meant to be a scheme set up for environmental and health benefits, Dublin bikes.


  • Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,734 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    OP - If you are to open a thread, please offer an opinion.
    Copying and dumping a piece from Wikipedia is not an opening for discussion.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement