In April 2024, the Waitaki District Council instructed its Chief Executive to request an extension of time from the Department of Health regarding the deadline for adding fluoride to the Ōamaru water supply.
In the letter, the Chief Executive outlined the Council’s concerns about the legal position surrounding the Director-General’s decision and highlighted strong concerns from sections of the community.
“Council also agreed to advocate to Parliament that under the principles of localism, local communities should have the right to choose whether fluoride is added to their water,” a spokesperson said.
The Mayor, in his letter to the Minister for Health, requested a reconsideration of the decision and noted that as the decision-maker about fluoridation, the Ministry of Health should be responsible for providing information about fluoridation to the communities, rather than councils who did not make the decision.
Last week, the Waitaki District Council received a response from Dr. Diana Sarfati, Director-General of Health.
In it, she cited the High Court decision in February and a subsequent decision in May as the legal basis for not granting extensions for the fluoridation directive.
The Director-General of Health also noted that the Health Act empowered her role to direct councils to fluoridate, and that councils must comply.
The Council is now working towards complying with their statutory duty by 30 June 2024, as directed.
Broadcaster Chris Lynch is an award winning journalist who also produces Christchurch news and video content for domestic and international companies. Chris blogs at Chris Lynch Media - where this article was sourced.
“Council also agreed to advocate to Parliament that under the principles of localism, local communities should have the right to choose whether fluoride is added to their water,” a spokesperson said.
The Mayor, in his letter to the Minister for Health, requested a reconsideration of the decision and noted that as the decision-maker about fluoridation, the Ministry of Health should be responsible for providing information about fluoridation to the communities, rather than councils who did not make the decision.
Last week, the Waitaki District Council received a response from Dr. Diana Sarfati, Director-General of Health.
In it, she cited the High Court decision in February and a subsequent decision in May as the legal basis for not granting extensions for the fluoridation directive.
The Director-General of Health also noted that the Health Act empowered her role to direct councils to fluoridate, and that councils must comply.
The Council is now working towards complying with their statutory duty by 30 June 2024, as directed.
Broadcaster Chris Lynch is an award winning journalist who also produces Christchurch news and video content for domestic and international companies. Chris blogs at Chris Lynch Media - where this article was sourced.
7 comments:
The chemicals – fluorosilicic acid, sodium silicofluoride, and sodium fluoride – used to fluoridate drinking water are industrial waste products from the phosphate fertilizer industry.
Of these chemicals, hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFSA) is the most widely used. HFSA is a corrosive acid which has been linked to higher blood lead levels in children.
Fluoride is neurotoxic, even at what we consider today to be low doses, and is NOT recommended for babies.
People living in fluoridated areas often suffer adverse effects from fluoride ingestion. IQ and brain function, Thyroid, metabolism and mood disruption, Bones and teeth fracture risks, Risk for bone cancer, Kidney patients’ fluoride toxicity, Enzyme disruptor to list a few.
So in spite of all this independent scientific research done on the harms of this industrial poison, the STATE is forcing it on its citizens, via local councils, who I thought were meant to be representing the wishes of their community??
Meanwhile, across the ditch, perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) - have been found in tap water in every state and territory of Australia.
Australian water contains contaminants that US authorities warn are likely to be carcinogenic, with "no safe level of exposure".
Personally, I am unconvinced about the toxicity of fluoride at the very low concentrations it is supposed to be at in fluoridated water. However, I challenge the legality of forcing people to ingest a medicine (fluoride is supposed to prevent a medical condition - tooth decay - so we can refer to it as a medicine) as no doctor can force a patient to ingest a medicine s/he doesn't want. We need a trial case to see whether this approach would work.
My worry is that with the typical easy going kiwi/maori/poly attirude of the staff of contractors far removed, accidental over concentrations seem likley. I not only worry about my health but also the hot water cyl and now universal butyl pipes. Ditto for chlorine, the true cost of even in normal concentrations must be tens of millions p.a.
There are benefits such as dental health. The dental health of people defines life expectancy often.
You can buy fluoride filters for the water ingested and maybe they should be made available, but fluoride is a health benefit. Ask any dentist.
Research in the U.S. on Fluoride has shown that it’s through topical application to the tooth that Fluoride is effective at toughening teeth. Ingestion through water on the other hand is much less effective and puts Flouride to every part of the body.Especially, but not exclusively, threatening to the brains of children. This sort of top-down, one -size-fits-all approach to Medicine is deeply flawed. It should be Good hospital infrastructure and personalised Medicine. The right Medicine for the right person at the right time. When the Directors General of Health cannot be trusted to be good for Health we have a problem. It’s time for a bottoms-up Movement by the people. TruthFreedomHealth.com
Fluoride cannot be filtered from water, it is a smaller ion than the water molecule.
Any dentist who has bothered to look at this issue critically and without bias is opposed to water fluoridation because a) systemic water topical application has a very minimal effect vs dietary changes and b) fluoride is a known neurotoxin and reduces the IQ of children ingesting it at levels below those used in NZ Tap water. It isn’t done in Europe for good reason.
It’s as poor a public health decision as adding lead to the water supply or recommending harmful injections for illnesses that have never been proven to exist as distinct entities. But like many public health policies they’re grounded in eugenics.
Fluoride can be filtered/removed from water by reverse osmosis.
Post a Comment