The use of fluorides in dental public health is an example of a class of chronically toxic chemicals that escapes the usual regulatory and assessment processes, avoids the fundamental principle of toxicology (namely to protect those at greatest risk) and violates medical ethics.
Sustainability is the goal or endpoint (if there is an end-point) of the process known overseas as "sustainable development" or, in Australia, as "ecologically sustainable development" (ESD).
This article focuses on fluoride, which has been largely ignored in Australia as a toxic chemical, because of its use in public health dentistry.
In six countries - USA, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Singapore and Columbia - more than 50 per cent of the population is exposed to drinking water fluoridated artificially to about 1 ppm (1 mg fluoride per litre of water) by public health authorities.
Depending upon the quantity of tap water ingested both directly and indirectly through food processed with fluoridated water, this results in daily fluoride doses approximately in the range 1.5-6.5 mg.
The first of these is the principle of informed consent to medication.
Contrary to the false impression created by some health and dental authorities, there is no scientific evidence supporting the notion that fluoride at a daily dose of several milligrams per day is a nutrient - indeed, there many communities around the world with much lower fluoride intakes who have excellent teeth.
In Australia, NSW Health, Vic Health and the Australian Dental Association have also refused to debate Professor Connett and other scientists who are opponents of fluoridation.
First published in the January/February issue of Chemistry in Australia a publication for professional chemists.
For a more general and extensive article on fluoridation read, 'A kick in the teeth for scientific debate', in Australasian Science, vol. 24, no. 8, September 2003.