Page 74 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 12 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
will notice how few recommendations we have made. I will read recommendation 10.136:
The committee recommends that:
The ACT Government -
the responsibility is here -
urgently seeks NHMRC funding to establish a major independent study on the effects on dental health of a reduced level of fluoride in the ACT water supply.
What is implied in that recommendation is this - and here I would agree with Mr Stevenson: Not enough research has been done. More research needs to be done. Conclusions have been made without adequate research. In particular, in Australia we have not had adequate research. That kind of conclusion that is in dark black type on page 102 continues in paragraphs 10.137 and 10.138. I endorse what has already been said. We acknowledge that there are other issues which require further research. I believe that the matters Mr Stevenson has drawn to our attention endorse that.
I am very pleased indeed that we have arrived at that particular recommendation. There is an urgent and vital need for enlarged levels, and scope, of research. It must be research independently conducted and done with a full spirit of scientific inquiry - not from some kind of industrial or industry concern or even dental concern, but as independent research.
Finally, I want to pause briefly on the issue of mass-medication and individual liberty, about which a few of us have spoken here and not much is said in the report. I will simply say this: I believe that this report, with its minority and dissenting report, is an example of the effective workings of democracy in this matter. I believe that this particular question should continue to be before the minds of those who consider these issues.
I have a strange comment on which to finish. Let me stress this. To some degree some of the dissenting material brings me to this. Despite the size of the report, its comprehensiveness, and the long time in which we have been debating these matters, this is not the end of the road in examining these issues. Times have changed since 1964, as Mrs Nolan has rightly said. They have changed greatly. Now, in 1991, we are suggesting making another start - another start vis-a-vis toothpaste, vis-a-vis what is added to the forms of toothpaste; vis-a-vis diet; vis-a-vis the amounts of fluoride. But, 10, 20, 30 years from now another committee with new personnel may have to do this work again for a new generation.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .