This page sets out a number of concerns relating to the policy that both The Expert Body on Fluorides & Health and the Department of Health refuse to adequately consider or address during ongoing communications.


  • What is the safe daily or lifetime dose of fluoride.  Regulatory authorities have to date failed to address this question taking into consideration the safety threshold of 4000mg as established by the Irish High Court and Supreme Court also fails to be taken into account given the wide and varying genetic predisposition and renal function known to exist throughout the population.


  • Have regulatory authorities considered the effect of in utero fluoride exposure on the developing foetus and specifically whether the maternal fluoride intake is responsible for a developing foetus suffering dental fluorosis to their teeth before birth.  Notification of this point was recently brought to The Expert Body who flatly rejected this claim and said fluorosis occurred during childhood yet the FSAI are now investigating the matter bearing in mind the European Commission sanctioned SCHER Report (2011) contained findings supporting this exact aforementioned conclusion.


  • Have regulatory authorities considered the human rights implications of the unborn and individuals to bodily integrity and that of individuals to provide free informed consent before medical treatment.  Apparently so but when the sources for the State’s position on this matter are scrutinised, it’s obvious that various reports or legislation referred to has been grossly misrepresented and the general population are therefore being medicated without consent along with their Fundamental Constitutional right to bodily integrity infringed upon.


  • The European Commission sanctioned SCHER Report (2011) published evidence proving prevalence levels of caries have been consistently reducing across many countries regardless of whether any fluoridation policy is implemented suggesting CWF (Community Water Fluoridation) is not necessary in the 21st century yet The Expert Body continue to state caries levels will increase if fluoridation was ceased and further, authorities in Ireland continue to attempt to create an evidence base in support of CWF, e.g The FACCT Study.


  • During the constitutional challenge to the Health (fluoridation of water supplies) Act 1960, one of the legally binding conditions attached to the legislation was that no citizen would suffer fluorosis, damage or harm to their teeth.  In 2017 in Ireland however, some 40% (Cochrane 2015 and York 2001) of the population are reckoned to suffer from dental fluorosis which UNICEF have previously deemed constitutes fluoride poisoning.


  • Conclusions of the HRB Review (2015) to which both The Expert Body and the Department of Health cite as supporting grounds for the policy’s continued sanction omit to inform the public that the Review authors were prohibited from considering effects (positive or negative) that fluoridation has on dental health which naturally prevented consideration of dental fluorosis or primary dentition fluorosis which appears to constitute a birth defect and for these reasons, the HRB Review therefore failed to achieve the status of an Independent Review and was therefore another Government whitewash of the matter.


The concerns above and many others raised in communications sent to regulatory authorities in Ireland call into question the assumed Constitutional status of water fluoridation in Ireland and it is therefore the view of Fluoride Free Towns that the continued policy of CWF in Ireland is both illegal and unconstitutional and those responsible for the continued sanction of the policy are guilty of committing a criminal offence under Section 12 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against The Person Act, 1997.