A
Green Party press office briefing
8 July 2003
Contact
Hugo Charlton or Spencer Fitz-Gibbon
Green
Party press office: 020 7561 0282
With
thanks to Douglas Cross
Contents:
1. Introduction
2. Fluoridation illegal under Poisons Act
3. Illegal under Codified Pharmaceuticals Directive
4. Violates code of medical ethics
5. Illegal medical research in Britain
6. Violates European Convention on Human Rights
7. Violates European Charter on Fundamental Rights
8. Illegal offer of indemnity under the Water Bill
9. In breach of consumer legislation
10. Voting on local fluoridation violation
1. Introduction
The Water Bill due before parliament tomorrow (9 July 2003) proposes to extend
the power of the health sector to enforce fluoridation of the public water
supplies. It also proposes to extend indemnity for consequential liability from
suit to water suppliers. These proposals are incompatible with existing English
legislation on the administration of poisonous substances, and violate English
and European Union provisions governing the use of medicinal substances. They
are also incompatible with international standards relating to medical ethics,
and the protection of the rights of the individual under human rights
legislation. The declaration by Lord Whitty on compatibility of the Water Bill
with the European Convention on Human Rights fails to address these
incompatibilities and is invalid.
2. The use of the specified chemicals for water
fluoridation is illegal
under the Poisons Act
Fluorosilicates are Part 2 Poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, and have no
medicinal use, as the Medicines Control Agency has repeatedly stated. Their
addition to the public water supply therefore constitutes a criminal action,
existing legislation on fluoridation notwithstanding. Reference to a poison in
the Poisons Act includes substances containing that poison. It is
consequently in violation of ss 23 and 24 of the Offences Against the Person
Act 1861, which forbids the administration of any poisonous or noxious
substance.
3. The use of unregistered substances for medicinal
purposes is illegal
under the Codified Pharmaceuticals Directive 2001/83/EEC
The intent to medicate renders any substance presented as having any beneficial
effect on a medical condition a medicinal substance under Article 1 of this
Directive, irrespective of its efficacy. All medicinal substances must be
registered as such, and subjected to full clinical testing for safety.
Fluorosilicates have not been so registered nor tested for safety.
Manufacturing these chemicals under BS EN 12174/5 does not authorise their use
as medicinal substances.
4. The use of fluoridation chemicals to medicate the
public
indiscriminately violates the code of medical ethics set out in the Council of
Europe's Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine
This Convention establishes a valid Code of Medical Ethics and is widely
accepted throughout Europe - the failure of the British Government to endorse
it does not render its provisions invalid, as all such national codes should
comply with the principles set out therein. States may not medicate any
individual except under exceptional conditions of recognised
public health emergencies. All medical interventions must be carried out under
proper medical supervision, and in accordance with the patient's needs and
fully informed wishes.
5. Water fluoridation as practised in Britain is
illegal medical research
In a Briefing Paper issued by the Medical Research Council, (June 2003) the
Government "asked the Medical Research Council to explore how any further
research could most productively be focused in order to strengthen the
knowledge base concerning water fluoridation and its effects on health."
This statement establishes that fluoridation is a medication, and that its
safety has not been adequately established and needs to be subject to 'further
research. The proposal to expose the whole population of the country to these
unregistered medical substances is therefore a proposal to carry out medical
research on an expanded experimental population, but has not been submitted to
scrutiny by an independent Medical Ethics Committee. It therefore violates the
guidelines set out in the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, and
constitutes medical malpractice by the State.
6. Water fluoridation
violates the European Convention on Human Rights
Paragraphs 56, 57 and 59 of the Home Office Guidance Notes on the application
of the Human Rights Act establish that fluoridation violates Articles 3 and 8
of the Human Rights Act, and also Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. Since
fluoridation is the illegal administration of a registered poison with no
medicinal authorisation, it constitutes a State sanctioned
criminal act against the public, and is incompatible with the Convention on
Human Rights and the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Where children
are involved - indeed, specifically targeted - such an act also raise issues
under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
7. Fluoridation violates
Article 35 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights
Under Article 35 of the Charter, the right to health care includes the right to
refuse health care, for whatever reason. It establishes the individual's right
to receive particular drugs or treatments - or to prevent them from having such
treatment administered against their wishes.
8. The offer of indemnity in respect to water
fluoridation under the Water Bill is illegal.
The offer in the Water Bill to extend indemnity against liability to water
suppliers constitutes an offer of contract between the Government and water providers.
The addition of registered poisons to the public water supply is a criminal act
that violates the provisions of the Poisons Act, notwithstanding enabling
legislation relating to these chemicals. Contracts that relate to illegal
actions are themselves illegal. Indemnifying defendants in criminal or civil
claims from the public taxation purse is a travesty of the responsibility of
Parliament to defend the rights of the people.
9. Water fluoridation is in breach of consumer
legislation, and implies
product liability.
Water is a product. The Water Quality Regulations governing the maximum amount
of a substance that may be present in drinking water are not a licence to add
that substance to the product up to that maximum. Any consumable product that is
subjected to illegal contamination by unregistered medicinal substances, or by
registered poisons, cannot be considered to be wholesome. Consumer product
liability does not require proof of medical damage or actual bodily harm.
10. Voting on local fluoridation
would violate Article 17 of the Convention on Human Rights (Prohibition on the
abuse of rights).
Permitting a public vote to establish a 'majority preference' violates the
principle of the absolute right of any individual to refuse that medication. It
constitutes an attempt to induce the public to endorse an act that violates the
rights of a (presumed) minority, and is illegal under Article 17 of the
Convention on Human Rights.
The Green Party gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Doug Cross,
environmental analyst and forensic ecologist.
Email doug@fieldforensics.co.uk
Website www.fieldforensics.co.uk