Comment Postcode Name
I am absolutely against this idea, originally from my instincts, and now, having read about fluoridation research from other countries eg. USA, New Zealand, China, India. The truth is that it appears to improve dental health in the early years but long term it does the opposite and also causes a number of serious health problems, not only in the bones but apparently now it seems in the soft tissue as well. Personally I would invest in a reverse osmosis system but this is costly and not an option for everyone, I know. Also it is not ideal in that it removes minerals, so obviously the answer is not to put the fluoride in the water in the first place. I don't understand how the doctors making the decision can be so stupid as not to understand the truth about fluoride; in fact I don't believe it. I'm afraid I believe they know and are simply endeavouring to improve their statistics in the short term for the health of children's teeth locally. Unfortunately they will probably achieve this, owing to the way fluoride works. SO15 3AT Jacky Frampton
It's likely children who dont clean their teeth enough, dont drink water either. put some fluoride in pepsi and we maybe onto a winner. SO18 1JN Mary Dickson
This is contamination of my water supply by a quango against public wishes, with risks to my health, and has been rejected by most countries across the world. Typical 'big brother' activities by an unelected health authority given powers (Water Act 2003) by a 'big brother' authoritarian government. In this case the water company has to do what it is told by the SHA, which in its turn has to indemnify the water company against any liability as well as paying the costs of fluoridation. SO504SA R Murchie
This government is always harping on about 'choice' whether it be things like schools or the nhs, but when it suits them, they are quite happy to take away the individual's choice, even for something as fundamental to human life as water. In an ideal world, surely the aim should be to make our drinking water as pure and unadulterated as possible, not to be adding chemicals to it as a cheap way to try and improve some embarrasing health statistics. I am all for something being done to help people with teeth problems, but mass-medication through the public water supply, when polls suggest the public are against it, is not the solution, in fact if it goes ahead, I find it a frightening example of how little say we have over our lives. SO18 1JN Jon Dickson
Personally I do not want fluoride put in my water supply because of the known health issues that can result from this. Also there are the environmental issues of many tons of this toxic waste getting into our rivers etc., because it can't be removed. But equally, if not more importantly, the majority of people have said no to fluoridation, yet an unelected committee of grey suits think they know best and totally ignore overwhelming opposition and decide it's in our best interest. The part of the Strategic Health Authority remit to take account of public opinion has been blatantly ignored. If this can take place in Southampton where overwhelmingly it is not wanted, then how much longer before this poison is insidiously introduced to all of our water supplies. This country is rapidly becoming a place of dictatorship run by unelected quangos and not a democracy. When I was at school George Orwell's 1984 was just a story, but Totalitarianism is rapidly becoming a reality... SO45 1FN Geoffrey Lilley
I have made an informed decision NOT to use a toothpaste with fluoride in it due to health concerns. I have previously used fluoride toothpaste and had fluoride treatment when younger that have left staining on my teeth (and not made any difference to fillings that were needed as a child). I am outraged that in a so-called democratic society, when the 'consulted' public decided by over 70% that they DID NOT want fluoride added to their water supply, the SHA have decided that they will IGNORE at best and REFUSE TO DO WHAT THE VAST MAJORITY WANTED!!! I have serious concerns on a health basis (that I have researched) about artificial fluoride - having decided not to use toothpaste with added fluoride, I will potentially be subjected (as will my dog who has perfect teeth!!!!) to additional intake of this toxic chemical through my skin (And if the skin is a barrier against harm, why have patches such as nicotine and HRT patches been developed?), I will be forced to drink it and cook with it. More of a problem to dental health has to be the lack of adequate dental cover since the privisation of dental contracts (and that HAS affected me adversely - I no longer have a dentist as I have been unable to register with an NHS one and cannot afford privated dental care). I URGE strongly that the Government (who PROMISED that no fluoride would be added without public agreement) LISTENS and ACTS upon the wishes of those members of the public who are affected by this undemocratic ruling and whose interests and wishes they are supposed to represent. SO32 2LE Anne Waggott
Why put fluoride into something that hardly anyone drinks anymore, esp. kids. Scientists should find ways of putting it into something useful, like coca cola and other fizzy drinks. SO19 0PW Katie Smedley
Because I do not want ingest what is essentially a poison. The evidence against it so overhwelming that the people who voted for it must be stupid? Or perhaps there is another reason? SO31 8HE Stephen Warren
People should have freedom to choose. It could have a detremental affect on some peoples health. Those that cant manage the simple task of cleaning their teeth regularly, could perhaps be given a tablet to chew instead,that contains Floride.the rest of us can be left alone SO5O9LU Jan Dunne
THOUGHT WE LIVED IN A DEMOCRACY..... NOT A DICTATORSHIP WHERE 12 PEOPLE CAN DECIDE ON THE FUTURE OF MILLIONS. DO NOT POISON OUR WATER SO16 4BB Lynn Cairley