Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/238416
Title:
Fluoridation: judgement of the Supreme Court of Ireland
Authors:
O'Dalaigh, Justice
Issue Date:
Sep-1964
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/238416
Item Type:
Legislation
Language:
en
Description:
This appeal is brought by the plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Ryan, against an order of Mr. Justice Kenny, dated 31 t day of July, 1963, dismissing, :with costs, the plaintiff's action, in which she sought a declaration that section 2, subsections (1), (2) and (3), and sections 3 and 4 of the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act, 1960 (No. 46/1960) are repugnant to the Constitution and invalid. "Having heard the evidence and read the literature which it was agreed I should read, I am satisfied that the fluoridation of the public water supplies at a concentration of 1 p.p.m. will not, in our temperate climate, be dangerous to anybody, old, young. healthy or sick. I am also satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that it may involve 'an element of danger or risk to life or health to any of the citizens of this country." (para. 35.) " It would, I think, be sufficient for the purpose of this case to say that the plaintiff has not proved that the fluoridation of the public water supply is dangerous hut T do not think that I should so confine myself. The evidence given on behalf of the plaintiff at the earlier stages in this case received wide publicity while the far more compelling evidence for the defendant received little public notice. It is possible that the evidence for the plaintiff, some of which was of a sensational character, may have created public uneasiness. Let me say then that I am satisfied beyond the slightest doubt that the fluoridation of the public water supplies in this country lilt a concentration of 1 p.p:m. will not cause any damage or injury to the health of anybody, young, old, healthy or sick who is living in this country and that there is no risk or prospect whatever that it will. The evidence on which I base this view consists of a number of separate items each of which is conclusive; when taken together, they are overwhelming." (para. 36.)
Keywords:
FLUORIDATION; WATER

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorO'Dalaigh, Justiceen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-14T10:39:57Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-14T10:39:57Z-
dc.date.issued1964-09-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/238416-
dc.descriptionThis appeal is brought by the plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Ryan, against an order of Mr. Justice Kenny, dated 31 t day of July, 1963, dismissing, :with costs, the plaintiff's action, in which she sought a declaration that section 2, subsections (1), (2) and (3), and sections 3 and 4 of the Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act, 1960 (No. 46/1960) are repugnant to the Constitution and invalid. "Having heard the evidence and read the literature which it was agreed I should read, I am satisfied that the fluoridation of the public water supplies at a concentration of 1 p.p.m. will not, in our temperate climate, be dangerous to anybody, old, young. healthy or sick. I am also satisfied that there is no reasonable possibility that it may involve 'an element of danger or risk to life or health to any of the citizens of this country." (para. 35.) " It would, I think, be sufficient for the purpose of this case to say that the plaintiff has not proved that the fluoridation of the public water supply is dangerous hut T do not think that I should so confine myself. The evidence given on behalf of the plaintiff at the earlier stages in this case received wide publicity while the far more compelling evidence for the defendant received little public notice. It is possible that the evidence for the plaintiff, some of which was of a sensational character, may have created public uneasiness. Let me say then that I am satisfied beyond the slightest doubt that the fluoridation of the public water supplies in this country lilt a concentration of 1 p.p:m. will not cause any damage or injury to the health of anybody, young, old, healthy or sick who is living in this country and that there is no risk or prospect whatever that it will. The evidence on which I base this view consists of a number of separate items each of which is conclusive; when taken together, they are overwhelming." (para. 36.)en_GB
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectFLUORIDATIONen_GB
dc.subjectWATERen_GB
dc.titleFluoridation: judgement of the Supreme Court of Irelanden_GB
dc.typeLegislationen
All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.