Historically, these approaches have resolved massive health problems that killed or maimed large numbers of people. Medical workers delivering health services in poor countries point out that opposition to these programs is only present in countries where those programs have been successful. “These are middle class affectations,” wrote Lindsay Rae of World Vision in response to an anti-vaccination campaign.
The problem is, governments have lost the trust of the people because of decisions that benefit major corporations, sometimes at the expense of the general population. When the pharmaceutical company Baxter, which has the contract to produce vaccines for the avian flu, accidentally released the live avian flu virus in Europe last month, it unleashed widespread fear of a deliberate campaign to harm people in the quest for profit.
The enforced delivery of medical services plays into the conflict between holistic and chemical medicine. Concerted campaigns by the medical profession have persecuted women, pagans and traditional healers across four centuries. These campaigns have often been brutal and overtly paternalistic attempts to centralise authority, knowledge and access to important substances.
At the same time, the disappearance of diseases such as polio and the reduction in fatalities from general infections and common diseases is directly attributable to modern, industrial medicine.
How then do you, Dear Reader, come to a well informed decision on something like flouridation?
My view, based on the research of many others is that we need to apply the precautionary principle. If we don’t know the consequences we should not pop the pill. We certainly should not compell the entire population to swallow it. Flouridation may well improve dental health, but the costs to mental health and the general well being of the population will not be known for another century or so.
This article appeared first in the Northern Star.