Tuesday, January 03, 2006
Scots reject Flouridation
The Hastings Safe Water Association
Dear Editor,
I am very angry at the type of coverage your paper gave our press release concerning the Scottish parliament’s rejecting Water Fluoridation.
Your readers would have read the one or two sentences you printed and have no idea why the Scottish Parliament acted as it did and with all political parties acting together to knock it on the head.
For the benefit of all Hastings residents and visitors, who are about to cop a load of dirty industrial grade fluoride in their drinking water,
‘The Scottish Executive (i.e., Scottish Parliament) has just rejected Water Fluoridation on Health, Safety, Medical Ethics and Human Rights grounds.
Controversial plans to introduce fluoride into the public water supply in Scotland are set to be abandoned, it emerged today according to the Scotsman (13/11/04). The Scottish Executive is understood to have axed the proposal in favour of better-targeted dental services. It is believed the Executive was also concerned about the implications of allowing individual local authorities to introduce the chemical into water supplies. Critics argued the fluoride plans were an infringement of freedom and were also unsafe. A source within the Executive reportedly confirmed today that fluoride measures had been shelved "for the foreseeable future".
This is relevant and your readers have the right to know this. As there are no longer any independent media in the Hastings we are forced to run our releases through your paper and other outlets. If you choose not to let residents know what is happening which is relevant, then you are creating public opinion.
We realise you can not cover all aspects of everything but Hastings residents would appreciate knowing what is happening concerning Fluoridation, as it will affect every single person living and visiting here.
We have had many phone calls this morning wanting to know why Scotland rejected Fluoridation. When we explained the reasons, callers were amazed that you had not covered such an important issue. Scotland rejected Fluoridation mainly because all parties now consider it an “abuse of human rights.”
Relevant enough?
Yours sincerely,
Therese Mackay
Dear Editor,
I am very angry at the type of coverage your paper gave our press release concerning the Scottish parliament’s rejecting Water Fluoridation.
Your readers would have read the one or two sentences you printed and have no idea why the Scottish Parliament acted as it did and with all political parties acting together to knock it on the head.
For the benefit of all Hastings residents and visitors, who are about to cop a load of dirty industrial grade fluoride in their drinking water,
‘The Scottish Executive (i.e., Scottish Parliament) has just rejected Water Fluoridation on Health, Safety, Medical Ethics and Human Rights grounds.
Controversial plans to introduce fluoride into the public water supply in Scotland are set to be abandoned, it emerged today according to the Scotsman (13/11/04). The Scottish Executive is understood to have axed the proposal in favour of better-targeted dental services. It is believed the Executive was also concerned about the implications of allowing individual local authorities to introduce the chemical into water supplies. Critics argued the fluoride plans were an infringement of freedom and were also unsafe. A source within the Executive reportedly confirmed today that fluoride measures had been shelved "for the foreseeable future".
This is relevant and your readers have the right to know this. As there are no longer any independent media in the Hastings we are forced to run our releases through your paper and other outlets. If you choose not to let residents know what is happening which is relevant, then you are creating public opinion.
We realise you can not cover all aspects of everything but Hastings residents would appreciate knowing what is happening concerning Fluoridation, as it will affect every single person living and visiting here.
We have had many phone calls this morning wanting to know why Scotland rejected Fluoridation. When we explained the reasons, callers were amazed that you had not covered such an important issue. Scotland rejected Fluoridation mainly because all parties now consider it an “abuse of human rights.”
Relevant enough?
Yours sincerely,
Therese Mackay
# posted by Middle Child @ Tuesday, January 03, 2006 
