Letter to Welsh Papers in response to Pro -Fluoridation article

Letter to Welsh papers in response to an article supporting fluoridation:The fluoridation debate, which has endured on and off for the last sixty years, is claimed to focus upon one problem, namely the reduction of dental caries in young children. In fact, juvenile dental decay is being used as the host proposition to conceal a very much bigger problem: the economic disposal of toxic, corrosive and radioactive non-biodegradable wastes from industries. It originated in post war USA when accumulations of Hydrogen fluoride from uranium enrichment processing were becoming a national embarrassment. Later, the Sodium fluoride residues from aluminium smelting were used; that was until the smelters found a more profitable use for it. It has now been replaced with a product distilled from the waste residues of fertilizer manufacture, diSodium fluorosilicate. Those who claim that the natural Calcium fluoride found in ground water is the same or even similar to fluorosilicate, should go back to their chemistry textbooks. Anybody worried about their children's tooth decay should ask themselves whether they are prepared to swap their fundamental right not to be compulsorily treated at the behest of the state, with the prospect of having a water supply contaminated with residues of lead, mercury, cadmium, silicon, arsenic, radium and - believe it or not - Polonium 210. Not one of these frightening carcinogenic and neurotoxicant mineral elements has ever been acknowledged by government scientists or public health officials, but 14 Nobel prizewinners in chemistry, medicine and toxicology have lined up in opposition to fluoridation.It is also worth noting that 95 per cent of mainland Europe has said NO to fluoride; so too has Bonnie Scotland, the land of English parliamentary influence.
Bernard J Seward Bristol