My organisation was once told by a Consultant employed by a Strategic Health Authority that WF is a “public health measure”. That is the only description that we could worm out of Public Health consultants. If you’re a scientist, you will want a little more information than an intangible qualitative description.

Public Health consultants want fluoride added to drinking water because it is intended to prevent dental decay, but fluoride is not a nutrient and is not a mineral, vitamin nor herb, so it can only be a chemical substance. Pharmaceutical medicines are formulated using chemical substances, and many contain fluoride. That does not automatically make swallowed fluoride safe, nor desirable.

Moreover, the British Standards which describe hexafluorosilicic acid and disodium fluorosilicate state in Annex A that the compounds are “used for the fluoridation of drinking water to increase the resistance of consumers to dental decay”. (BSEN 12174:2013, p.19 and BSEN 12175:2013, p. 19.) That sentence denies that the fluoridating acid is a water treatment chemical. Since it is not for water treatment, then it is for human treatment.

Ironically, water companies are not allowed to add anything to drinking water if a beneficial mineral such as magnesium is deficient in the raw water. If they did so, then they would be ‘medicating us’ since magnesium is a recognised and legal beneficial mineral. It does not increase the potability of treated water.

And yet it has been ordained that humans need fluoride for dental health, and that was accordingly written into UK law in 1985. The stupidity of this is that whilst magnesium is essential for dental health and for many other processes in the body, fluoride is not essential and, in fact, is now considered as being a neurotoxicant/ “presumed developmental neurotxin”.

The fluoridating acid is clearly added to drinking water to prevent dental decay. Therefore, it’s a prophylactic – a preventive agent but it is not licensed as a medicine. Vaccinations are also prophylactics, but they are given a medicinal authorisation. Also, most vaccinations are administered after individual consent – a highly important medical and ethical principle. At the time of writing, it is only the smallpox vaccination which is legally enforceable. Smallpox in the worldwide population is now wiped out, and that UK law has not been invoked for decades.

Water Fluoridation is Compulsory Medicine

Fluoride in drinking water is compulsory medicine in the UK once the Government has required water companies to add it to drinking water. Its compulsory nature is nonsensical: dental decay is not life-threatening whilst vaccinations for smallpox were intended to save lives and to prevent a virulent spread. Situated in the middle of this theme is folic acid.

It is added to white bread flour to prevent neural tube defects such as spina bifida. This condition is not infectious, but the Government has required its use. However, one can avoid eating this type of flour although it is more expensive to do so.

Complete avoidance is easy in comparison to avoiding fluoridated drinking water because even though we can filter tap water, it’s far more difficult to avoid washing or bathing in fluoridated tap water.

Moreover, once it is in our environment, it is encountered everywhere.

To reiterate, water fluoridation is a medicinal compulsory intervention for a non-infectious disease. The chemical is systemic and 50% of it bioaccumulates. Seat belts being compulsory for a non-infectious disease is an argument which is contrived by those unsuccessfully trying to justify fluoridation. In this case, we are not swallowing the seat belt and there really can be no comparison.

WF is mass medication using a non-clinically tested medicinal substance intended to cause a physiological change to our teeth.

Consent

“Consent” is an ethic which is the foundation stone of the NHS Constitution. Only Acts of Parliament can override the principle of “consent” as was the case with smallpox legislation.

To violate the principle of consent for a non-infectious illness seems, to the thinking person, a strange action by the establishment, particularly since the practice of water fluoridation to this day remains an experiment. (No clinical testing; no longitudinal controlled research to prove safety = ongoing experimentation = violation of the Nuremberg Code 1947.)

As previously highlighted, it is difficult to avoid drinking fluoridated tap water unless one filters out the fluoride. This is expensive and self-discipline in needed. But it had best be attempted because it does more than alter our teeth: it alters our bodies. If people agree to drinking fluoride, that’s their decision, but for others it’s a case of “it’s my body, my choice and I choose not to drink the chemical”.

The Government desires a physiological change to our teeth. The change is due to the deposit of fluoride in developing enamel although the alteration of dentine is an unintended consequence.

More importantly is the unsightly development of Dental Fluorosis where

fluoride “punches holes” in developing enamel when the teeth are developing under the gum. The damage to teeth begins as soon as the permanent teeth buds start to form under the gum. Conventional dental opinion is that enamel starts to form from the age of 6 months, and that is why the Committee on Toxicity has recommended limiting exposure to fluoride from the 6th month of life. However, some dental text books describe development of the permanent teeth tooth buds soon after birth and that is when fluoride starts to bioaccumulate.

It appears that an Act – The Water (Fluoridation) Act – overrode the principle of “consent” in 1985. That Act is a very bad Act indeed because it was enacted with a hidden 3-line-whip. It was not a free vote.

How could it have been when 399 MPs abstained from agreeing or disagreeing with the legalisation of WF? Fluoridation was legalised with a majority of 82 (For F – 165; Against F – 82; Abstained – 399, excluding the four Tellers.) Those MPs who abstained, realised the enormity of removing the right to consent.

After 1985, fluoridation law was strengthened in 2003 so that it became compulsory if the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, after a Public Consultation, orders a Water Company to make arrangements to instal fluoridation equipment in its Water Treatment Works (WTWs). The 2003 law was The Water Act 2003, s.58.

More Legal Stuff

Primary Law (The Water Act 2003) orders water companies to fluoridate their treated water when required to do so, and companies must obey this instruction. On the other hand, there are laws which should now make it difficult for water companies to acquiesce. For example, it is not permitted in law to use hexafluorosilicic acid as the vehicle for the addition of fluoride to manufactured food and liquids. This retained EU law is EU Reg. 1170/2009, Annex III which does, however, permit the addition of sodium fluoride to milk and potassium fluoride to salt. The UK Government failed, when it had the chance, to apply to the EU to have hexafluorosilicic acid added to the list of permitted substances and consequently, according to EU Law (and thus according to UK Law) hexafluorosilicic acid use is illegal even though it is specifically listed in the permitting/enabling legislation which is The Water Industry Act, 1991, s.87.

The above paragraph illustrates some of the complexity of the legislation entangling the topic of WF.

Mass Medication

If we choose to ignore UK law for now, we would still be on firm ground by regarding WF as being mass medication which violates the provisions of the Nuremberg Code 1947, clauses 1, 4, 6 and 10. We are being experimented on since there have never been any clinical trials to demonstrate the safety or otherwise of swallowing the deliberately added fluoridating acid (hexafluorosilicic acid). Yes – fluoride may occur naturally and, in this case, its presence in drinking water is not a deliberate act. In the UK, the concentration of natural calcium fluoride is, on average, reasonably low – 0.05 – 0.4 mg fluoride/litre.
Water companies do not have to remove natural fluoride although in Hartlepool where the normal concentration is 1.9 mg fluoride/litre, the treated water is diluted with non-fluoride water to bring the concentration down to below the maximum allowable – 1.5 mg fluoride/litre of water.

Dr David Shaw explores this topic further In a well-argued paper.

Citation for Public Consultation 2023: Shaw, D. (2012) “Weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth: The legal fiction of water fluoridation.” Medical Law International 2012.12.11. The UK Government denies that fluoridated water is a medicine, but it can be nothing other than a medicine.

A Legal Paradox

The situation is a total legal paradox:

– A fluoridating acid which is not permitted under EU and UK law is deliberately added to drinking water as a prophylactic to prevent dental decay. (Retained EU Reg. 1925/2006; EU Reg. 1170/2009, Annex II/III and UK Reg 1631/2007)

– The same fluoridating acid is permitted under UK law for deliberate addition of fluoride to drinking water. Water Industry Act 1991, s. 87.

– The same fluoridating acid is not permitted under UK law because the acid contains a compound of fluorine – hydrofluoric acid – which is not listed as being permissible in that permitting Act. Water Industry Act 1991, s. 87.

– Hydrofluoric acid is a reportable poison and is listed in the UK Deregulation Act 2015, Schedule 21, Part 4. This replaced the Poisons Act.
– The use of an unregistered substance for medical purposes breaches the EC Codified Pharmaceuticals Directive 2001/83. The Government should register fluoride as a medicine and subject it to full clinical testing, but it has not been registered nor clinically tested.

– Fluoridation also breaches the European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 3 and 8. That is a serious difficulty, as the UK adopted, either directly or indirectly, a body of legislation that the 2003 Water Act breached and in some cases, they should have obtained the consent of the European Community.

Ernest Davies MP, Under-Secretary of State (Foreign Office) signing the Convention on behalf of the British Government in 1951, four years before the British Water

Fluoridation Demonstration Trials

– Water fluoridation also breaches Articles 3 and 35 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, which state that: ” In the fields of medicine and biology, the following must be respected in particular: (a) the free and informed consent of the person concerned.” Article 35 establishes the individual’s right to receive particular drugs or treatments. The implication is that the individual can prevent such treatment administered against his/her wishes.

– The UK Government are in breach of both treaties, and the offer of indemnity to water companies is therefore illegal.

– Water Fluoridation has been under the control of UK Health authorities since 1955 For those who doubt that fluoridated water is a medicine, the following is the chain of responsibility for the practice in the UK:

– In 1955, eight small areas of England, Scotland and Wales were selected for the initial demonstrations”. Overseen by G. E. Godber, Chief Medical Officer, Department of Health and Social Security.

– Cities and Areas were gradually fluoridated from 1964 – 1987. Overseen by Local Authorities’ Health Boards.

– In 2002, responsibility transferred to the Strategic Health Authorities during this time,

right up to 2012.

– Responsibility transferred to Public Health England and to Health Scrutiny Committees (Local Authorities) from 2013 to 2021.

– Responsibility transferred to the Office for Health Protection and Disparities (OHID) , an agency of the Department of Health and Social Care in 2021.

Water Fluoridation must be something to do with health?

Individuals drink the “health-giving liquid” ordained by the Chief Medical officer and by OHID/DHSC so it must be medicine. Medicines must be licensed and clinically tested.

No licence – no legality

Fluorides are not added to drinking water as a water treatment chemical even though the title of the British Standards imply that they are water treatment chemicals. So, the only reason why fluoride should be added is to cause a physiological change to our bodies and this makes fluoridated water a medicine. We can’t easily nor successfully completely avoid.

drinking the medicine. No-one who is currently fluoridated, apart from residents of Allerdale,* Cumbria, has ever been asked for consent. No-one who is currently fluoridated was consulted before the Health Authorities decided unilaterally to initiate WF programmes between 1955 and 1989. The fluoridating acid is added to drinking water so entire communities must drink it.

Therefore, Water Fluoridation can be nothing other than Mass Medication without consent and the Nuremberg Code 1947 is consequently engaged.

Written April 2020

Updated 4th February 2023

* Allerdale residents were asked to vote in a Public Consultation in Autumn 2001. The vote was 69 in favour of fluoridation and 338 not in favour. 83% of the respondents were against fluoridation.

Strangely enough, water companies are not allowed to add anything to drinking water if a beneficial mineral such as magnesium is deficient in the raw water.  If they did so, then they would be ‘medicating us’ since magnesium does not increase the potability of treated watert.  And yet it has been ordained that humans need fluoride for dental health and it has accordingly been written into UK law.  The irony of this is that magnesium is essential for dental health and for many other processes in the body whilst fluoride is not essential and, in fact, is now considered as being a presumed developmental neurotoxin.

The fluoridating acid is clearly added to drinking water in order to prevent dental decay.  Therefore, it’s a prophylactic – a preventive agent.  Vaccinations are also prophylactics but they are assigned medicinal authorisation.  Also, most vaccinations are administered after permission is given by the parent/guardian of a child.  This is the important principle of “consent”.  At the time of writing, it is only the small pox vaccination which is more or less compulsory.  Since small pox is no longer endemic, that particular law has not been invoked for many years. 

If most people believe that Covid-19 is a very real threat to society and vaccination is necessary to prevent infection, then most people will probably agree to becoming vaccinated – but only if the vaccination has been tested and shown to be safe.   One wonders if a new law will be enacted which will make vaccinations against Covid-19 obligatory?  In the meantime though, fluoride in drinking water is the only compulsory medicine in the UK  This is nonsensical because dental decay is not life-threatening whilst vaccinations are intended to save lives.

“Consent” is a primary ethic which is the foundation stone of the NHS Constitution.  Only Acts of Parliament can override the principle of “consent”.  And so it appears that an Act – The Water (Fluoridation) Act overrode the principle of “consent” in 1985.  That particular Act is a very bad Act indeed because it was enacted with a hidden 3-line-whip.  It was not a free vote.  How could it have been when 399 MPs abstained from agreeing or disagreeing with the legalistation of WF? Since 1985, fluoridation law has been strengthened so that it is now compulsory if a local authority, after a Public Consultation, orders a Water Company (via the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care) to make arrangements to instal fluoridation equipment in its Water Treatment Works (WTWs). 

Beause it is difficult to avoid drinking fluoridated tap water unless one positively filters out the fluoride (which is expensive and which requires discipline), WF is mass medication using a non-clinically tested medicinal substance intended to cause a physiological change to our teeth.  We know that it it does effect our teeth because of the development of Dental Fluorosis.  The damage to teeth begins as soon as the permanent teeth start to form under the gum.  The jury is out on the exact timing that development starts.  Conventional dental opinion is that they start to form from the 6th month of life although there are dental text books which show development soon after birth.

Primary Law orders water companies to fluoridate their treated water and companies have to obey this instruction.  On the other hand there are laws which ought to make it difficult for water companies to continue to obey.  For example, it is not legal to use hexafluorosilicic acid as the vehicle for the addition of fluoride to food (and water is food).  This piece of EU law permits the addition of sodium fluoride to milk and potassium fluoride to salt.  The UK Government failed, when it had the chance, to apply to the EU to have hexafluorosilicic acid added to the list of permitted substances and consequently, according to EU Law (and thus according to UK Law) hexafluorosilicic acid use is illegal even though it is specifically listed in the current permitting/enabling legislation which is The Water Industry Act, 1991, s.87.

The above paragraph illustrates some the complexity of the legislation entangling the topic of WF.

If we choose to ignore the law for now, we would still be on firm ground by regarding WF as being mass medication which violates the provisions of the Nuremberg Code 1947.  We are being experimented on since there have never been any clinical trials to demonstrate the safety or otherwise of swallowing the fluoridating acid.  Yes – fluoride may occur naturally but that type of fluoride is not added deliberately.  In the UK, the concentration of natural calcium fluoride is, on average, reasonably low – 0.05 – 0.4 mg fluoride/litre.  Also, it does not contain several undesirable contaminants.  Water companies do not have to remove natural fluoride although in Hartlepool where the normal concentration is 1.9 mg fluoride/litre, the treated water is diluted with non-fluoride water to bring the concentration down to 1.3 mg fluoride/litre.

The LINK takes you to a paper written by David Shaw in which he explores this topic further. 

Ref: 

Shaw, D. (2012) “Weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth: The legal fiction of water fluoridation.” Medical Law International 2012.12.11 http:mli.sagepub.com/content/12/1/11

To illustrate the total legal mess:

A fluoridating acid which is not permitted under EU and UK law is deliberately added to drinking water as a prophylactic to prevent dental decay.  (EU Reg. 1925/2006 and UK Reg 1631/2007)

The same fluoridating acid is permitted under UK law for deliberate addition of fluoride to drinking water. (Water Industry Act 1991, s. 87).

The same fluoridating acid is not permitted under UK law because the acid contains a compound of fluorine – hydrofluoric acid – which is not listed as being permissible in that permitting Act. (Water Industry Act 1991, s. 87).

Hydrofluoric acid is a reportable poison and is listed in the UK Deregulation Act 2015, Schedule 21, Part 4.

An interesting case arose in Australia in 2012 which describes the conundrum of two pieces of law which are at odds. The LINK takes you to an explanation of this ruling. We believe that Judge Biscoe’s ruling did not eventually prevail: this needs further investigation.

Fluoride is not added to drinking water as a water treatment chemical even though the title of the British Standards imply that they are water treatment chemicals. So the only reason why fluoride should be added is to cause a physiological change to our bodies and this makes fluoridated water a medicine. We can’t successfully avoid drinking the medicine. No-one who is currently fluoridated has ever been asked for consent. No-one who is currently fluoridated was consulted before the Health Authorities decided unilaterally to initiate WF programmes between 1955 and 1989. Therefore, WF can be nothing other than Mass Medication.