Re: Complaint over fluoridation vote THE recent article in the Southern Echo refers to Cllr Damani speaking and casting a vote at the meeting of city councillors were 26 to 18 came out in favour of fluoridation. As reported in the Echo she told the meeting 'This is not a poison'.

This comment clearly indicates her lack of knowledge regarding the issue she voted in favour of, as fluorosilicic acid is a poison. It is more toxic than lead and only slightly less toxic than arsenic.

The article also states that Cllr Damani works as an equality and human rights advisor. In view of this one would have thought that she would have taken some interest in the human rights aspect of water fluoridation.

Consent is required for any form of medical intervention, preventative or otherwise. Every competent adult has the fundamental right to refuse medical treatment. Despite going to extreme lengths to persuade the public that fluoridation of the water supply prevents dental disease, the Health Authority insists it is not a medicine. Although fluorosilicic acid is a medicinal product as defined by EU Directive 2004/27/EC, it is not registered as such. In addition European Court of Justice rulings establish that: 'if a product is represented to the public so that any averagely well-informed person gains the impression that the substance might have a beneficial effect on some medical condition, then that substance is a medicine under the terms of this Directive'.

I agree with John Spottiswoode that the whole vote is unsound, not only due to Cllr Damani voting even though she declared an interest as an employee of the health service but also due to a questionable understanding of the substance to be used and the ethical issue of mass medication.

Name and address supplied.