GUY Harkin (letters) former director of the NW Fluoridation Evaluation Group gives an impressive list of fluoride supporters, but says little of his own investigations. Did his group take note of the York Review, whose Report, their scientists believe, was “The only defensible assessment of the evidence world wide’’?

The BMA, BDA etc, are professional associations, not research bodies.

However, if they have any important findings with regard to fluoride safety, I only wish that they would disclose it. I have been writing to them all for years in pursuit of this mythical data, which they all seem to know exists, but which no one has ever been able to provide. Nor has Ms Senior, so far, rushed to reveal it.

I was shocked to see Mencap and Help the Aged on the above list. Does Mencap know or care about the peer reviewed toxilogical research which found a higher incidence of Down's Syndrome births in fluoridated areas and brain damage to infants ranging from lowered IQ to mental retardation?

Is Help the aged aware that the elderly are more vulnerable to harm because of impaired kidney function and more liable to thyroid deficiency?

Many older people are also taking anti-depressants like Prozac (fluoride compound) which increases the risk of over exposure. Was it because of this damaging research that they were approached for a seal of approval so that safety concerns could be countered with a reputable name? Mencap should be particularly sensitive on this issue as they have been pro-active in raising ethical concerns about forcing medical treatment on those deemed incapable of witholding consent.

I am writing to these charities to ask for an explanation of their fluoride support and informing them while they maintain it, I shall not be willing to donate to them. I hope other readers will consider doing the same.

Kate Boulton , Biddulph, Staffs.