NHMRC Public Consultations

Skip Navigation and go to Content
Visit NHMRC website

Draft NHMRC Public Statement 2017: Water fluoridation and human health in Australia submission

Personal Details
First Name: 
Last Name: 
Van der Velde
Question 1
Q1. A. The draft Public Statement is presented in a format and manner that is useful, and is easy to read and understand: 
Comments on a particular section of the Public Statement: 
Question 2
Q2. A. The boxed ‘NHMRC statement’ (page one) in the draft Public Statement is justified and supported by the evidence in the Information Paper: Effects of Water Fluoridation on Dental and Other Human Health Outcomes : 
Question 3
Q3. A. For policy makers, the draft Public Statement provides sufficient information to support decision making in your jurisdiction or local area: 
Overarching/General comments on the Public Statement: 

In this information paper it is mentioned many times that "There is no reliable evidence of an associationar between water fluoridation at current Australian levels and (fill in disease)."

There is a long list of diseases that are possibly linked to water fluoridation. Government research has shown "insuffincient evidence" that these diseases are linked to water fluoridation, please have a look at the following links because there is a lot of research out there proving the toxicity of fluoride:




I'm also concerned with the ethics of fluoridation. In the information paper it is mentioned that people can choose not to drink fluoridated water by drinking bottled water, rain water or use a reverse osmosis filter. These 3 options cost money are wasteful and unnecessary. Water is a basic human right, we pay for it. Why can't the government supply fluoride tablets to people who want to ingest fluoride? 

Thank you,

Lisa van der Velde

Comments on a particular section of the Public Statement: 
Question 4
Q4. How could the Public Statement be effectively disseminated?: 

Page reviewed: 9 November, 2017