Two points in your report on the fluoridation proposals need straightening out. The actual findings of the team conducting the York Review were given thus:
1. Fluoride could not be said to be safe
2. Fluoridation would be unlikely to address dental health inequalities
3. Dental fluorosis was not merely a cosmetic issue
4. More good quality research was needed
Since the Health Minister at the time, Frank Dobson had initiated the review as a once-and-for all study, these findings did not suit his preconceptions and the public announcement, given only once, very rapidly on a BBC Radio 4 early morning news bulletin, said precisely the opposite; a classic government spin job.
The second point concerns the claim of fluoride safety at a concentration of 1 part per million.This is cold water as it leaves the tap. Warming it raises the fluoride level. Unlike chlorine residues which evaporate, fluoride will concentrate to the tune of 100 per cent upon boiling a kettle and something approaching 800 per cent for as long as it takes to cook vegetables. Taking a hot bath becomes a health hazard by dermal absorption and young children are especially vulnerable. When I challenged the Drinking Water Inspectorate to justify its responsibilities under these conditions, its reply stated that the product supplied conforms to the regulations. Whatever use the consumer makes of the product is beyond the control of the DWI. How many of our parliamentary representatives are aware of this cop out?Bernard J Seward(Unfluoridated) Bristol