High Court finds Ashley Bloomfield’s fluoride directive unlawful
Dear Ms Ardern,
Regarding your announcement that Government is proceeding with the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill which seeks to amend Part 2A of the Health Act 1956.
Key considerations
- Ministry of Health advisors to Government on fluoridation have been overly influenced by the dental profession.
- According to a Ministry of Health response to me from an Official Information Act request for Ministry research on the whole-of-body effects (not just teeth) of ingesting fluoride little, if any, such work has been undertaken by the Ministry.
- So narrow is the Ministry’s view of fluoridation that the contract establishing the former National Fluoridation Information Service included a requirement that the NFIS would “. . . not act in any way that may contradict or be inconsistent with Ministry policy on water fluoridation or with the MoH publication Good Oral Health for All, For Life” both of which unequivocally advocate fluoridation.
- When deciding to authorise district health boards to mandate adding to community water supplies what the US National Toxicology Program presumes to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans Government must be absolutely sure of all potential health consequences.
- Serious consideration must be given to the issues commented on below before the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill comes before Parliament for a third reading.
- The Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Bill should be withdrawn pending an independent public enquiry, with evidence taken on oath, on the whole-of- body impacts of community water fluoridation on public health (not just teeth) with future Ministry of Health policy development on the issue based on the outcomes of the enquiry and its recommendations. see full letter
Related posts
