I strongly agree with Dr. Ward's well-researched facts against tap-water fluoridation published by the Hub Oct. 15.

Dr. Hazel Lynn recently stated that we do not want to see scientific evidence in favour of fluoridation (Sun Times, Sept.27). On the other side, there are some ten Nobel prize winners, scientists representing 97 per cent of the European population, Sierra Club, many doctors and other health professionals who oppose fluoridation of tap water. Their opinion is based on well-researched scientific evidence.

I am comparing the statement of the Nobel laureate in medicine Dr. Arvid Carlsson with the statement by Dr. Hazel Lynn.

Dr. Carlsson: (from the interview before the Kamloops referendum): "Fluoridation of water is definitely obsolete. If you drink it, you are running the risk of all kinds of toxic actions. In modern pharmacology it is so clear that even if you have a fixed dose of a drug, the individuals respond very differently to the same dose. Now, in this case you have it in the water and people are drinking different amounts of water. So you have huge variations in the consumption of this drug. It is against the all the modern principles of pharmacology. It's obsolete, I don't think anybody in Sweden, not a single dentist, would bring up this question anymore. Fluoridation is not worth the risks. Side effects cannot be excluded."

Dr. Lynn, in the Sun Times: "When you look at the evidence, and there's lots of communities that have been through this, the folks that are determined in a belief system that fluoride is killing everybody, you are not going to change their minds with scientific evidence because they do not want to see the scientific evidence."

It is Dr. Lynn who does not want to see the scientific evidence against her

opinion, in my view. Based on scientific facts, most of Europe (repeat: 97 per cent) have rejected fluoridation. Dr. Carlsson was among many scientists against fluoridation. Kamloops, Calgary, Quebec City, Portland, Basel, Waterloo and many other places rejected fluoride in a referendum.

Decline in cavities has been observed in Europe after the discontinuation of fluoride in water. A World Health Organization report published in 2012 states the number of missed, decayed or filled number of teeth for 12-year-olds by country: Denmark 0.71, the Netherlands 0.8, Sweden 0.9, Belgium 0.8, and so on... United States, 1.19. The European countries mentioned do not use fluoride in water or salt. Sixty-three per cent of the U.S. population uses fluoridated water.

Most countries discontinued fluoridation, in the following years: Sweden 1971, Germany 1971, The Netherlands 1976, Soviet Union 1990, Finland 1993, Japan in 1972, Czech Republic 1990. Only about 32 per cent of Canadians drink fluoridated water and the number is on the decline. None of our adjacent communities uses fluoride.

So, Dr. Lynn seems to be behind the times. What I most resent is her telling us what to take seriously and what not to take seriously, what is science and what is not.

Dr. Ward explained the dangers of forced fluoridation very well. You can find support for his statements all over the internet. My personal conclusion: As Dr. Carlsson explains, the effect of fluoride varies from individual to individual. Fluoride is also present in substances such as black tea, wine, potatoes and many others. So it depends on your lifestyle -what you consume, how much tap water you drink - and how you respond to this chemical. The combination of these factors can become dangerous for certain individuals and can result in the development of brittle bones, dental fluorosis, thyroid disruption and others. Why push this unwanted substance on everybody and put a certain percentage of users in danger?

Promoting better dental hygiene is a much more effective and safe option. So I am asking you to say yes to the discontinuation of the fluoride in our water.

Maks Zupan M.Sc. P. Eng.
Owen Sound