Weekly Summary: The Water Ingredient Debate

 

Weekly Summary: The Water Ingredient Debate

This week, we pushed forward on five key fronts, each exposing cracks in New Zealand’s handling of fluoridation.

1. Ministry for the Environment (MfE)

• We asked MfE whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) exists for fluorosilicic acid discharges into public water.

• Their reply: “Not our problem— Talk to the Ministry of Health.”

• Translation: the agency charged with environmental protection disclaims responsibility for toxins entering the environment.

2. Ministry of Health (MoH)

• An OIA request is active with MoH.

• We expect hedging on the evidence base, infant health, and toxicology.

• If they refuse, that refusal itself is part of the public record: the Ministry responsible for health won’t acknowledge risk to babies but are happy with the teeth health idea.

3. Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)

• We asked the simplest question: is water an ingredient in food?

• Labels across NZ say yes, yet MPI have tried to deny it.

• When they admit it, the trap snaps shut: water = food ingredient → fluorosilicic acid = food additive → must be tested, labelled, and regulated.

4. Local Councils

• Rotorua Lakes Council unanimously resolved to ask the Minister of Health to withdraw the fluoridation directive until a full public inquiry is held.

• Tauranga City Council confirmed wastewater discharge is monitored, but no fluoride-specific environmental assessment exists.

5. Community Education (Megan Hamilton)

• Megan Hamilton, Team Leader, Water Education Programmes, replied on behalf of Tauranga City Council.

• By her title, she holds responsibility for community water education.

• The unanswered question: where is the programme to inform pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers, and infants—the highest-risk cohorts—that fluorosilicic acid exposure increases risk three- to fourfold?

---

Where We Stand

Every agency has chosen the same defence: delay, deflect, deny.
But every “not our problem” is evidence. Each evasion builds the paper trail. Together, it proves what the public has never been told: no EIRs exist, no infant safety programme exists, and yet toxins are added to our water under the guise of “protecting teeth.”

And the biggest factor to consider:

EVERY report that supports Fluordation of water does so on the examination of Fluoride and NOT Flurosilicic Acid, a completely different chemical with completely different properties.

At what point is the evidence going to be recognised by the people we put in place to look after us?