Letter: Water quality
Water fluoridation seems to be an emotive subject.
Fluoridation of water can cause skeletal and dental fluorosis and has been stopped in many countries overseas. Fluoride is only useful in the development of teeth until 16, after this topical application is needed, so all adults and denture wearers are receiving fluoride unnecessarily - if they can drink the water.
The water quality in my house is so poor that we mostly use it for washing and the fish tanks, after removing the chlorine.
My grandson never drinks tap water as it is not potable, so instead of adding fluoride to the water, this council needs to make the water drinkable. As a cost-saving measure, it didn't UV treat our water, but can spend that money on reports.
My second point is unnecessary spending and council business. This council is there to run the city on behalf of the residents not spend unnecessary money tarting it up on a few people's wishes.
How can it spend this sort of money on ''cosmetic'' changes when water pipes need to be replaced? As this affects Esk St, I presume it will deal with this first.
My final point again relates to council business. It is not there to ban a legal practice such as smoking, especially while allowing drinking on the footpath in town.
Banning it at the crematorium will only add more stress to the bereaved, and is not the council's role. My breathing suffers on Esk St etc, passing people wearing perfume and aftershave. Are they going to ban these for the benefit of asthmatics? Probably not, so why penalise legal smokers for unsubstantiated theories.
(Abridged - Editor)
The Southland Times