IT is good to see ‘Water clean-up with wildlife in mind’ but rather curious that it is suggested while the decision about whether humans should have a class two poison, hexfluorosilic acid, added to their water supplies is being made.
Should we remind those concerned that only a fraction of this is drunk by us, while most of the rest will find it’s way back into the environment!
The government recently ordered the Drinking Water Inspectorate to find out more about the pharmaceutical chemical cocktail that is increasing rapidly in our rivers (and which includes fluoridated cancer drugs such as fluorouracil) but is happy to add a non-medically approved substance.
Wildlife is, of course, awarded protections denied to humans. A warty newt is protected where I am not.
A bat is protected where you are not. The question of whether ‘environment’ includes humans has never really been satisfactorily answered.
However, in an area of farming and of very expensive fishing the following may be of interest (while remembering that farmers now have 17 pages of fluoridated pesticides approved by the PSD).
Richard Foulkes, BA, MD (Physician). Former consultant to the Minister of Health, Province of British Columbia, Canada: A review of literature and documentation suggests that concentrations of fluoride above 0.2mg/L have lethal effects on and inhibit migration of ‘endangered’ salmon species whose stocks are now in serious decline in the US Northwest and British Columbia.
Fluoride added to drinking water, ‘to improve dental health’ enters the fresh water eco-system, in various ways, at levels above 0.2 mg/L.
This factor, if considered in ‘critical habitat’ decisions, should lead to the development of a strategy calling for a ban on fluoridation.
Lennart Krook DVM, PhD (Pathology). Emeritus professor of pathology, Cornell University and New York State College of Veterinary Medicine: The economically most important effect of (fluoride) ingestion is decreased milk production. Milk calcium (Ca) is derived in equal parts from food and bone tissue.
Fluoride is toxic to bone resorbing cells and with decreased resorption the cow does not produce Ca deficient milk but less milk in proportion to the F burden.
The ideal (fluoride) ingestion is zero. Tolerance levels should be reduced to levels that protect cattle and farmers.
We reap what we sow. When the crop comes up it may be too late!
Margaret Reichlin, MacCallum Road, Upper Enham.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article