A Green Party press office briefing
8 July 2003
Contact Hugo Charlton or Spencer Fitz-Gibbon
Green Party press office: 020 7561 0282
thanks to Douglas Cross
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
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
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.