Full Girl Against Fluoride Letter

OPEN LETTER TO THE CHAIRMAN AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF IRISH WATER

Dear Ms Hynes,
We are writing this open letter to you on behalf of the growing number of people in Ireland who object to the addition of Hydrofluorosilicic Acid to the public water supply. This practice is carried out purportedly for beneficial health reasons and justified on ethical grounds. It is designed to increase the level of fluoride in all of our drinking water so that it reaches a small number of children who may otherwise be at risk of an increase in dental carries. Manufacturing our drinking water in this way directly results in an increase in the fluoride intake of all individuals reliant on public water supplies. You will all be aware that there is a growing body of public and scientific opinion that seriously questions the ethical and health grounds advanced to justify this practice and which raises grave concerns for the adverse health effects that it is causing to vulnerable groups of persons.
Those who have no choice but to consume water that has been manufactured in this way are accumulating fluoride in their bodies to such an extent that it has caused and is continuing to cause disease. The reason fluoride levels are accumulating to such an extent in the bodies of persons living in this State is because artificially fluoridated water is now not the only source of fluoride in our diets and health care routines. Products other than water that contain fluoride can be avoided but water is such a primary and staple element of our nourishment that we cannot do without either consuming it directly or preparing our food and drinks with it. By far the easier and more practical way to avoid the over accumulation of fluoride in our bodies is to ensure that our drinking water has as low a fluoride level as possible.
More and more people now take exception to being medicated/treated in such a haphazard, outdated and non-effective fashion. It is clear that this health care policy is well past its sell by date and amounts to a violation of the bodily integrity of those who have no choice but to consume it and amounts to an assault on their person as they have not given their informed and voluntary consent to it. In particular the constitutional rights of the child are being violated.
We invite you to note and consider the following summary of a relatively recent report from the European Commission (16th May 2011);
‘EU Commission - Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER), Opinion on critical review of any new evidence on the hazard profile, health effects, and human exposure to fluoride and the fluoridating agents of drinking water –
Systemic exposure to fluoride through drinking water is associated with an increased risk of dental and bone fluorosis in a dose-response manner without a detectable threshold. Limited evidence from epidemiological studies points towards other adverse health effects following systemic fluoride exposure, e.g. carcinogenicity, developmental neurotoxicity and reproductive toxicity; however the application of the general rules of the weight-of-evidence approach indicates that these observations cannot be unequivocally substantiated.

The total exposure to fluoride was estimated for infants, children, and adults from all sources of fluoride, e.g. water based beverages, food, dietary supplements, and the use of toothpaste. Contribution from other sources is limited except for occupational exposure to dust from fluoride containing minerals.

The upper tolerable intake level (UL), as established by EFSA, was exceeded only in the worst case scenario for adults and children older than 15 years of age at a daily consumption of 2.8 L of drinking water, and for children (6-15 years of age) consuming more than 1.5 L of drinking water when the level of fluoride in the water is above 3 mg/L. For younger children (1-6 years of age) the UL was exceeded when consuming more than 1 L of water at 0.8 mg fluoride/L (mandatory fluoridation level in Ireland) and assuming the worst case scenario for other sources. For infants up to 6 months old receiving infant formula, if the water fluoride level is higher than 0.8 mg/L, the intake of fluoride exceeds 0.1 mg/kg/day, and this level is 100 times higher than the level found in breast milk (less than 0.001 mg/kg/day).

The cariostatic effect of topical fluoride application, e.g. fluoridated toothpaste, is to
maintain a continuous level of fluoride in the oral cavity. Scientific evidence for the protective effect of topical fluoride application is strong, while the respective data for systemic application via drinking water are less convincing. No obvious advantage appears in favour of water fluoridation as compared with topical application of fluoride…’ (emphasis added)

Clearly the independent scientists selected by the European Commission have concluded that when fluoride from all available sources is taken into account the upper limit of fluoride intake is exceeded by children aged between 1 and six years of age who consume more than 1 litre per day of our artificially fluoridated water. The situation is even more grave in regard to bottle fed infants who are being poisoned when this water is used to make up their formula feeds.
Serious personal injury has been caused to many thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands of residents here as a direct consequence of the water fluoridation policy, not the least of which is Dental Fluorosis. As a consequence many victims are presently obtaining legal advice and will shortly be commencing personal injuries actions in the courts seeking damages and costs.
It is expected that in the coming months the growing and very consider able resistance to the continuation of the artificial fluoridation of public water supplies will manifest itself in multiple High Court and Circuit Court actions.
Future customers of Irish Water will not be prepared to enter into a contract with Irish Water for the supply of artificially fluoridated water and a nationwide campaign to withhold water charge payments until such time as the water supplied is not artificially fluoridated will commence.
Particular groups of people in the country, such as those with diabetes, kidney disease, thyroid dysfunction, children between 1 and 6 years of age, bottle fed babies and the elderly are more vulnerable than others to the toxic effects resulting from the ingestion of fluoride no matter what its source.
To date the State has failed in its duty of care to warn of the dangers of the over consumption of fluoridated products such as the modified water delivered via the public water supply. These dangers were well known by numerous Government departments as they have been fully documented for many years. The State has taken it upon itself to cause and permit dental fluorosis and other adverse health effects without the informed consent of its people and without any warning whatsoever as to the risks / dangers involved in consuming the modified water. In the face of all of the peer reviewed scientific and medical literature that is known to State officials, the State continues to refuse to acknowledge that there is a legal obligation upon it to warn consumers of the dangers involved in the over consumption of this water and that safe levels of consumption will depend on individual age, health, dietary and life style criteria. It is not a case of ‘one size fits all’ and there is an urgent need to take all appropriate steps to warn the public of the dangers of excessive fluoride consumption.
It is now generally considered dangerous to a baby’s health if their parents make up formula bottle feeds with artificially fluoridated water containing between .6 and .8 ppm. It is also clearly dangerous for young children participating in sporting activities to consume this water above a certain level. To date the State has chosen to bury its head in the sand. However the day of reckoning is imminent and it will soon have to justify having failed to take action to its hard pressed taxpayers when it has to spend millions of their euros undoing, in so far as such is possible, the damage caused. The absence of any health warning is clearly negligent and directly results in fluoride overdose with sometimes irreversible and catastrophic consequences.
We are now convinced by the peer reviewed research carried out by highly respected members of the scientific and medical community (such as those who were selected by the EU to compile the report quoted from above) that a significant number of residents who drink even average amounts per day of this artificially fluoridated water will be overdosed with fluoride resulting in adverse health effects. As you will be aware it is impossible to limit the amount of artificially fluoridated water that will be ingested, especially in the absence of a nationwide information campaign warning of the dangers. In the circumstances it is our view and the view of our legal advisors that Irish Water would be carrying out a reckless and negligent act by continuing to operate the public water supply system in a way that involves artificially fluoridating it knowing that it will result in fluoride overdose with consequent personal injury, loss and damage. You and your fellow board members have personal responsibility not to cause injury in this way irrespective of whether or not there is a law mandating the practice. The existence of the law may not provide you with a defence to either criminal or civil prosecution where you recklessly cause personal injury to another. Consequently the immunity that government ministers might enjoy does not necessarily apply to each of you. You will, as the persons responsible for the operation by your servants or agents of the fluoridation systems, be open to prosecution.
In addition it ought to be noted by you all that in order to continue with the artificial fluoridation of water it will be necessary for Irish Water as the new operators of the system (or its agents ad interim, the local water authorities) to contract for the delivery and storage of Hydrofluorosilicic Acid. This acid is extremely toxic and highly dangerous. In the event that there was an accidental spillage large numbers of persons would be at risk of death or serious injury. The safe transportation and storage of the acid cannot always be guaranteed. We are of the view that it should only be transported in tankers of the highest safety standard and under a security escort so as to ensure safe delivery. This is not happening at present. We are also of the view that the present storage and dosing facilities are seriously outdated and that neither safety nor dosing within presently permitted limits can be guaranteed. This view is supported by the fact of the recent chemical contamination of the Dublin water supply and the Water Authorities annual reports which consistently show the finding of levels of fluoride at levels higher than that which is legally permitted (in reckless disregard for the health of consumers).
The Irish taxpayer and those who will shortly be paying water charges will have to bear the costs, conservatively estimated at some E14 Million per annum, incurred in the purchase, the safe and secure transportation, the storage and the dilution into doses of this highly toxic chemical which when diluted creates fluoride. Given the fact that the Irish people are suffering enormous financial pressures it is manifestly unfair and unjust to expect them to carry such a burden when the purported efficacy of the fluoridation policy is under such serious question.
Further you will no doubt be aware that Fluorosilicic Acid is not a permitted ingredient in food and medicinal products under EU and Irish law and that the sale/and or supply of product (in this case artificially fluoridated water) that has been made with even a diluted form of Fluorosilicic Acid (ie hydrofluorosilicic acid) potentially exposes the Irish Water to litigation from many sources.
Also, most if not all food and drink producers in Ireland use the public water supply in the manufacture of their products. It is clear that artificially fluoridated water that has been produced by adding an unlicensed food / medicinal ingredient is wholly unfit for purpose and could result in the withdrawal of large amounts of product from the market place across the EU, causing considerable loss to the entities involved.
We strongly believe and have been so advised that there is both a legal and moral duty on the board of directors of Irish Water to immediately inform its customers that this product (ie artificially fluoridated water) is manufactured using an ingredient that is not permitted under EU regulations and directives and that their artificially fluoridated water ought not to be used in the preparation of foodstuffs including drinks or medicines. Whether the ingredient itself ie Hydrofluorosilicic Acid is altered into its constituent parts in the process of manufacture is as you know irrelevant.
We firmly believe that the addition of Hydrofluorosilicic Acid to the public water supply is now unlawful irrespective of whether or not it has any purported beneficial health effect for a small element of the population. We publicly call upon and strongly urge you to immediately undertake not to produce artificially fluoridated water in this way so that our public water supply policy may be brought into line with the standards that our fellow Europeans enjoy and who have ready access to non artificially fluoridated water.
The water fluoridation policy is causing grave and serious damage to many, including children and infants. We want to reiterate that this letter is intended to put you all on unequivocal notice of the harm being done by this outdated and discredited policy. Further, we believe that a failure to cease or at the very least suspend implementation of the policy will give rise to a cause of action in negligence and trespass to the person by all those whom you do not immediately inform of the health risks in consuming the artificially fluoridated water.
We now demand that you immediately inform the parents of all bottle-fed infants and all members of other vulnerable groups, of the dangers to their health posed by consuming fluoridated water from the public water supply as you now know that the average consumption per person of fluoride from all sources is estimated to be at such a level as to cause adverse health effects in particular categories of persons and that fluoridated water is by far the largest source of such intake.

As all of the matters raised above are of an extremely urgent nature and of considerable national and public importance we look forward to receiving your comprehensive reply at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

_________________
Aisling FitzGibbon
Spokesperson for
The Girl Against Fluoride Campaign