---
Dear Mr Bayley,
I noted last week that the Health Secretary, Alan Johnson MP, is
leading a drive to encourage the fluoridation of water supplies. Two
parts of his statements seemed important to me. Firstly, he suggested
that there is strong evidence that the fluoridation of water is of
benefit to dental health. Secondly, he encouraged debate of the issue
at a local level.
In 1999 the Department of Health commissioned a systematic review from
the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of
York into the efficacy of fluoridating drinking water supplies. This
review was 'unable to discover any reliable good-quality evidence in
the fluoridation literature world-wide'[1]. The CRD has been at pains
to make its findings known, and to ensure that they are understood. In
fact, it released a statement asking that the relevant decision makers
make themselves aware of the contents of the report. The full text of
the statement and report can be found on the CRD website at
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd
Given the results of the review, commissioned by the Department of
Health, I am surprised that the Minister is supporting this initiative.
As my MP, I was wondering if you would be able to find out why this is
so, especially given the recent emphasis placed by many members of the
government on making evidence based decisions. Clearly, this policy is
in conflict with the existing evidence.
In addition, as the Minister suggested asked that debate occurs at a
local level, I would like to add my voice to those asking that the York
water supplies are not fluoridated, if for no other reason than it
seems foolish to waste public money on a project that has no shown
benefit. If of course any future well-conducted studies were to show
benefits of water fluoridation, I would happily change my position.
Yours sincerely,
LSNDuck
[1] CRD, October 2003: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment