Fluoride (Hansard, 26 February 1985)

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if any studies have been brought to his attention which indicate that fluoride is a cause of genetic damage;
(2) if any studies have been brought to his attention which indicate that fluoride is carcinogenic;
(3) if any studies have been brought to his attention which indicate that fluoride causes damage to plant and animal life.

§ Mr. John Patten
Our independent scientific advisers have considered the relevant work on the genetic effects of fluoride as used in water fluoridation schemes to achieve a concentration of one part per million in the drinking water of whole communities. They have also considered all the available evidence on the biological effects of fluoride in short term tests, animal carcinogenicity tests and the epidemiological evidence recently reviewed in the report of the working party on fluoridation of water and cancer, copies of which are available in the Vote Office. They have concluded that there is no evidence leading to an expectation of a mutagenic hazard to man through the induction of heritable abnormalities in the germ cells and that there is no reliable evidence of any hazard to man in respect of cancer from the fluoridation of drinking water to a concentration of one part per million.
The effect of toxic concentrations of fluoride on plants and animals are well documented. However, it has been established that irrigation with water containing fluoride at one part per million does not cause adverse effects on plants, and that the use of fluoridated water at the same concentration in the diet of animals has no harmful consequences.

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what is the precise nature, extent and duration of the consultation that he expects health authorities to conduct, and with whom, prior to any request to a statutory water undertaker to add fluoride to water supplies.

§ Mr. John Patten
The Government have accepted that the Water (Fluoridation) Bill should be amended in order to place a statutory duty on the health authorities to undertake proper public consultation before deciding whether to apply to the statutory water undertaker for fluoridation. We are considering the precise terms of the amendment in the light of the views expressed during discussion of the Bill.

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list all those local authorities which have passed a resolution on the addition of fluoride to the water supplies, indicating against each one whether a decision was in favour or against.

§ Mr. John Patten
The following health authorities in England are understood to have requested water fluoridation. In the main, these requests were made by area health authorities. New requests for fluoridation after enactment of the Water (Fluoridation) Bill will fall to be 137W considered by district health authorities. Only the then Wirral AHA is known to have resolved not to request fluoridation.
Regional Health Authority AHA/DHA' s which requested Water Authorities to introduce fluoridation
Northern

Durham AHA

South Tyneside AHA

Sunderland AHA

Northumberland AHA

Cleveland AHA^*

Cumbria AHA^*

North Tyneside DHA^*

Northumberland DHA^*

Yorkshire

Bradford AHA

Calderdale AHA

Kirklees AHA

Leeds AHA

Wakefield AHA

Scunthorpe DHA

Humberside AHA^*

Grimsby DHA^*

Scunthorpe DHA*

Trent

Derbyshire AHA

Leicestershire AHA

Nottingham AHA

Rotherham AHA

South Derbyshire DHA

Bassetlaw DHA

Central Nottinghamshire DHA

Nottingham DHA

Doncaster DHA

East Anglian

Cambridge AHA

Norfolk AHA

Wessex No requests
North West Thames

Bedfordshire AHA

Brent and Harrow AHA

Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster AHA

Ealing, Hammersmith and Hounslow AHA

Paddington DHA^*

North East Thames

Essex AHA

Camden and Islington AHA

Redbridge and Waltham Forest AHA (North East Thames RHA subsequently on behalf of Thames Region as a whole.)

South East Thames

Greenwich and Bexley AHA

Bromley DHA

Oxford

Berkshire AHA

Buckinghamshire AHA

Northamptonshire AHA

Oxfordshire AHA

South Western

Avon AHA

Cornwall AHA

Gloucester AHA

Somerset AHA

Devon AHA

South West Thames

Surrey AHA^*

West Sussex AHA^*
138
Croydon AHA^*

Kingston AHA^*

Merton and Sutton AHA^*

West Midlands

Birmingham AHA

Walsall AHA

Hereford AHA

Staffordshire AHA

Warwickshire AHA

Dudley AHA

Sandwell AHA

Wolverhampton AHA

Salop AHA

Coventry AHA

Solihull AHA

Mersey

Cheshire AHA^*

Liverpool AHA^*

St. Helens AHA^*

Sefton AHA^*

North Western

Lancashire AHA

Bolton AHA

Bury AHA

Manchester AHA

Oldham AHA

Rochdale AHA

Salford AHA

Stockport AHA

Tameside AHA

Trafford AHA

Wigan AHA

^* Health authorities which are known to have had discussions with Water Authorities but have made no formal request.

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services if he will list in the Official Report all those areas in the United Kingdom which do not have fluoride added to the water supplies but which have enjoyed a reduction in the incidence of dental caries of a similar or greater extent than areas which have had fluoride added to the water supplies over a comparable period.

§ Mr. John Patten
This information is not available nor would it in any case constitute a valid test of the effectiveness of water fluoridation. Studies which have been carried out in this country contrasting comparable fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas have consistently shown that the reduction in dental decay is between one third to one half greater in the fluoridated than in the comparable non-fluoridated area. For a survey of the results of recent British studies, my hon. Friend may wish to consult the journal "Community Dental Health (1984) Volume 1", pages 47 to 54, a copy of which I have sent to him.

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what studies Her Majesty's Government have made, or are aware of, as to the extent of ingestion of fluoride by the population as a result of eating food such as vegetables grown on land irrigated with fluoride-containing water or processed in water containing fluoride; what conclusions have been drawn; and if he will make a statement;
(2) why it has not been considered appropriate for the chemicals normally used to add fluoride ion to the public water supply to be submitted to the Committee on Safety of Medicines; and if he will make a statement.

§ Mr. John Patten
I shall let my hon. Friend have replies as soon as possible.
139W

§ Mr. Best
asked the Secretary of State for Social Services what information he has to the LD50 level of fluoride ion in animals, specifying the animals involved.

§ Mrs. Fenner
I have been asked to reply.
I shall reply to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.