Anti-fluoride claims criticised

The claims from the Ministry of Health that fluoride is "Safe and Effective" are sadly misleading. You would think that in the 40- odd years since the practice of mass medication was introduced, they would have conducted a full scale NZ scientific study on the safety of water fluoridation. This has not been done. The Ministry is sadly unaware of the precautionary principle, which tells us that if there is a single doubt, leave it out.
Jonas
Maryhill

The comments by David Crum of the Dental Association, on fluoride and bone cancer, are misleading.
The study by Bassin and colleagues at Harvard University, published in 2006, showing that consuming fluoridated water raises the risk of developing a kind of deadly bone cancer, is the best study done on the subject. It is high quality science and means that if health authorities were doing their jobs, fluoridation would now be suspended to allow further research. David McRae, Geelong, Australia

Dear Sir
Could I correct the last sentence in my recent letter please. It should have read:
I am not a member of FANNZ and was not involved with the preparation of the pamphlet stating that there was "an 85% chance" that the death of a 17-year-old from bone cancer was caused by water fluoridation" and concluding that fluoridation was "not worth the risk" (ODT, 7.11.08). However, the claim by the New Zealand Dental Association executive director, Dr David Crum, that the claim was misleading and false can be challenged. Dr Elsie Bassin et al. found that the odds ratio for developing osteosarcoma for males exposed to water fluoridated at a level of 0.7 ppm or more at age 7 years was 5.46 (Cancer Causes Control 2006; 17:421-28). This means that with fluoridated water the risk is increased by 546% and that 85% of the cases of osteosarcoma in this group will be due to fluoridation.
Thank you
Bruce Spittle