In response to Robert Bain’s letter, Fluoride Debate, (MNW, 08/11), once again, here’s an example of ‘dinosaur’ mentality. The belief that the ingestion of fluoridated water is beneficial to dental health has been refuted by dentists. Time and again, concerns amidst the facts are presented by dentists, doctors and specialists alike and still this ‘parroting’ of antiquated and false beliefs spew forth from the mouths of those who refuse to listen.
The fluoride poured into water supplies is Hydrofluorosilicic acid, H2SiF6, a by-product of the phosphate fertiliser industry and it originates in the chimney stacks. It’s a corrosive, toxic, hazardous waste that 97 per cent of Europe refuses to put in their water supplies. Why? Do the research!
The kidneys excrete 50 per cent of fluoride. The other 50 per cent is absorbed in the body. This does not go to the teeth. Fluoride has to be applied topically to the teeth by way of toothpaste, fluoride mouth rinse or tablets to make any difference.
Hydrofluorosilicic acid has a negative effect on health, with compromised thyroid function being one of many. Fluoride contributes to hypothyroidism, as it inhibits the uptake of iodine which is essential for the proper functioning of the thyroid gland. Iodine is the basic building block of the T3 and T4 hormones.
In a study cited from the National Centre for Biotechnology Information (US Library of Medicine), scientists concluded that fluoride exposure impacts on the thyroid gland and, “exerts a complex and relevant effect on T regular cells in humans”, i.e. thyroid hormones T3 and T4.
Not only is this a warning for those with healthy thyroid glands but for those who already suffer with thyroid diseases, such as hypothyroidism and Hashimotos, myself included. This is just one of many health concerns.
Mr Bain, if you want fluoride treatment, practice good dental hygiene and cut down your sugar consumption. This advice applies to all sections of the community. One very important thing you, the NSW Department of Health, NHMRC and others fail to recognise is that force-feeding a chemical into a population, no matter how big or small, is a violation of human rights and, as 97 per cent of western European countries acknowledge, is unethical.
Rose Ferguson, Pambula Beach
My objection to the proposed development of a recreational flight School school at Frogs Hollow is based purely on the invasive nature of the development, and the threatened loss of my “quality of life” in my own home. It would not a quiet, unobtrusive development that would have minimal impact on me, but the complete opposite.
The very notion of concentrating the noise of multiple light aircraft, taking off and landing, in a picturesque rural community, is obscene. Adding to that, the fact the “noise” will continue, unabated for many, many hours, and for days on end, it is really unconscionable, and should be dismissed immediately!
The families at Frogs Hollow and the surrounding area have worked hard to establish their lifestyles, and they need councillors to knock this money-making scheme on the head, once and for all. Every dollar this repulsive proposal could make for a small number of people in the Bega Valley would be earned at the expense and pain of an existing resident.
Finally, the insidious nature of noise pollution itself sees it permeate all aspect of life and makes it impossible for those suffering to find relief from it. If it is directly overhead or even off at an angle, it dominates the environment - you can't turn off your hearing or look away.
I can only hope our BVSC decision-makers and fellow residents, who have known the tranquility of our rural paradise, will agree and not allow our lives to be destroyed forever.
Ian Gordon, Toothdale/Frogs Hollow