Sunday, 27 April 2008

Latest from Southampton on Freedom of Information request

Latest on Freedom of Information request in Southampton from campaigner John Spottiswoode:

I am very disappointed by the below response to my request under the Freedom of Information Act for a copy of the Technical Report into the fluoridation of water in Hour area. I do not want to get into an official dispute with a body that is meant to be looking after our health. South Central SHA is meant to be serving the public, not hiding things from us, and it is very depressing when the latter seems to be the case.

I did not ask for the information in the context of its environmental impact. I already know that will be serious as 99% of the fluoride put into the water is likely to go directly into the environment polluting our agricultural land and fisheries, plus be put into the atmosphere via steam from factories and in homes. This means that we well get a ‘multiple whammy’ of fluoride from several fronts as soon as it goes into the water. I asked for the report under the Freedom of Information Act, and I continue to ask for it under that legal protection for the public from officialdom’s arrogance. Your refusing to supply this information by using a legal get out clause is not in the spirit of openness that most people should expect from those whose job it is to serve our health interests.

Furthermore yesterday I was shocked to read in the Daily Echo in a letter from Dr Andrew Mortimer, public health director of Southampton City Primary Care Trust that we already have 0.3 parts per million of fluoride in Southampton’s water supply. This is a revelation and unknown publicly, as far as I am aware, before this letter. The British Fluoridation Society statistics (if you can trust them) in ‘One in a Million’ says that there is NO fluoride in Southampton’s water from natural or any other sources. Is this fluoride from pollution upstream, or from the boreholes?

So exactly whom does this fluoride poison affect in Southampton and the surrounding area? Will the SHA tell us or is it ‘confidential’ and those being poisoned have no right to know?
I presume that this revelation must have come from the Technical Report that you are refusing to let me and the public see. This sort of information is very important to those concerned about the purity of our water supply. For instance this information alone is likely to prompt those who understand the dangers of fluoride, and can afford it, to install reverse osmosis water treatment in their houses.

Indeed it is important that the Health Authorities insist that this nasty poisonous chemical is removed from Southampton’s water as soon as is practical.
But the concern in this area is that snippets from the Report are being used to back pro-fluoridation arguments and is being withheld from those opposed to water fluoridation. Is this part of the SHA’s Communication Strategy - to win the argument for fluoridation by releasing key data to those arguing in favour, but this same information is being hidden from those opposed? This sounds very Machiavellian in the worst way.

I repeat again that it is essential that you release this Technical Report immediately for the public good.
In the spirit of openness, that I at least uphold, I am copying this to other interested parties. John Spottiswoode

Friday, 25 April 2008

Water talk and AGM in Stroud

Water talk: a look at the mysteries of water and why water fluoridation would be bad for Gloucestershire

Bernard Seward will be talking about IQ and water fluoridation while Simon Charter will be looking at water quality and showing us some experiments.

Open to all followed by the AGM of the Safe Water Campaign on Sat 17th May 1.15 in the British School, Painswick Inn, Stroud.

Tuesday, 8 April 2008

Could Fluoride be linked to Obesity?

This is an interesting discussion on the problems of low thyroid activity. Whilst he does not link it to fluoride, as fluoride is found in research to adversely affect the thyroid and the pituitary, both mentioned in the article, then this could be a major cause of obesity. See:
So Fluoride could be a factor-in-weight-gain-despite-normal-tests.
Highly fluoridated places like the USA are known to have major obesity problems, but the tendency so far has been to blame junk food and over-eating. Whilst this may well play a part, why does the body demand lots of food, but then not use it?
It would be a plausible theory that the body knows that it is short in certain nutrients, so hunger is created, but the thyroid under-activity means that the body does not use this food before a separate mechanism puts the extra to fat.
This leaves the body still short of nutrients, so still hungry (or rapidly hungry again), but not using the food quickly enough when it is eaten so more and more goes to fat. The fact that the food may be junk food contributes to this negative cycle, but the fluoride poisoning may be an equally important effect.