Earl Baldwin of Bewdleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they continue to receive subsidies from the United States Government to promote the fluoridation of the United Kingdom water supply; if not, when was the last date such subsidies were received; and what sums were involved. [HL1963]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hayman)We can find no record of such subsidies having been received.
Earl Baldwin of Bewdleyasked Her Majesty's Government:
In view of the absence of any relevant scientific studies cited in the US Review of Fluoride, 1991, referred to in the Written Answer by Baroness 158WA Hayman on 8 February (WA 1–2), whether they can quote any other scientific sources in support of their belief that dental fluorosis is only a cosmetic side-effect of fluoride and not an indication of early toxicity. [HL1964]
§ Baroness HaymanWe accept that dental fluorosis is a manifestation of systemic toxicity, since it is partly caused by bloodborne fluoride. There are also accounts, in tropical countries, of a type of skeletal fluorosis which is associated with dental fluorosis. However, in developed countries where the amount of fluoride in drinking water is tightly controlled, there is no evidence of any correlation between this cosmetic effect on teeth and any kind of systemic ill-health. The studies and reviews cited in my noble friend Lady Jay of Paddington's Answer to the noble Earl's Question of 12 November 1997 at columnsWA 34–35 support our view that the fluoridation of water at one part per million represents no threat to general health.