IN response to John Winstanley's remarks (Letters, September 21), supporting evidence on the adverse effects of fluoridation is plentiful and widely available. Hundreds of scientific papers and studies have been published over 50 years and are freely available in the public domain.

The National Pure Water Association has evidence and information on its website www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk

Secondly, Mr Winstanley said that in my previous comments, I gave no evidence that in non-fluoride water areas the results are any better, but unfortunately two examples which we gave were edited out.

The first showed that using the same pro-fluoridation supporters statistics, it is possible to show a case against fluoridation. For example, unfluoridated Liverpool had the same level of tooth decay in children at Gateshead which has been fluoridated since 1964 and they are both in a similar social and economic group.

And affluent Surrey and Sussex has some of the best dental records in the country, but no fluoridation.

On "The freedom to choose the medication we take," from the legal point of view fluoridation is compulsory medication. Why is it considered right to medicate a whole population irrespective of the individuals' medical history and without their consent?

The open debate on fluoridation which Mr Winstanley wants would be welcome. We are available at any time to attend such a forum.

Also normal water filters will not remove fluoride. The only way is by reverse osmosis filter which is quite expensive.

LINDA FORREST (Mrs), Chairman, Fight Against Fluoridation, Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley, 41 The Hazels, Wilpshire, Blackburn BB1 9HZ. Tel. 01254 246662.