The online advocacy group, Making Sense of Fluoride are welcoming the recent High Court decision to dismiss an attempt by New Health New Zealand to find the fluoridation of water unlawful.
The decision will remove any legal or judicial questions that may have concerned councils, allowing them to go ahead with water fluoridation. However, New Health New Zealand has announced that they will be appealing the decision.
The Making Sense of Fluoride group believes legal action taken by New Health New Zealand against fluoridation is a politically motivated campaign against evidence-based health and medicine. The group, created by the New Zealand Health Trust, is a lobbying group for alternative, natural health initiatives. Any successful appeal against fluoridation will be followed by similar attacks on science-based health policies opposed by the group such as vaccination, genetic engineering – even ‘chemtrails’ – a conspiracy theory that claims governments use commercial planes to spray toxic and mind controlling chemicals into the atmosphere.
The New Zealand Health Trust is a charitable trust that aims to promote ‘complementary health care products, devices, practices and services and general health research for prevention, diagnosis and treatment,’ using ‘media campaigns and promotions.’
Financial transactions for the trust show large amounts of money coming in – last year $200,000 in “grants” were spent on ‘legal and consultancy’ fees for their High Court case against fluoridation.
Making Sense of Fluoride questions how an industry lobby group is able to achieve charitable status and why it should be subsidised by taxpayers through its ‘charitable’ tax exemption.
Making Sense of Fluoride legal spokesperson, Christopher Atkinson, welcomes an investigation into the funding methods of such groups saying ‘local body councils should not be held to ransom by such groups with commercial and ideological agendas. They should not be bullied into ignoring the wishes of their citizens by such legal action,”
“MSoF believes parliament should enact legislation indemnifying councils and councillors, therefore protecting them from legal action and financial threats when important health policies like fluoridation are at issue.”
‘Fluoridation is well-founded scientifically. It is known to be safe and effective. It is very effective as a social health policy because it does not require individual action.’
