Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator. The response I have is virtually the same I had the last time we debated this. The Senator is very passionate about it. As I said the last time I was here, I have no difficulty coming here to answer and be held to account by people who are passionate on particular issues, whether I agree with them or not. It is important. During our last debate, I told the Seanad I had been listening to the argument since I was an adult because my late father-in-law was as passionate about the Senator's side of the argument as she is. The difficulty is that the research has found no firm evidence on one side or the other, and this is why the Health Research Board was asked to examine the research in terms of the written evidence and come to a conclusion. I am not certain it will come to a conclusion. The report it was asked to produce will hopefully be completed and published this April. It has been delayed.

I have a great interest in research. Everybody in the country has been listening to the latest research on peanut allergy and whether one should feed peanuts to young children. The research now tells us that one should allow very small children to build up an immunity which may reduce the likelihood they will have allergies. While I am not certain which of us would be prepared to take the risk of doing it with our very small children, nevertheless research and people's opinions change constantly. We asked the Health Research Board to carry out a literature review for us, which it has done. It included the University of York review, which was published in 2000 in the UK, and which was quoted during our previous debate on this.It also included the Australian symptomatic review of the efficiency and safety of fluoridation, which was published in 2007 and the European Commission's scientific committee on health and environmental risks review published in 2011, to which the Department of Health contributed. None of these reports established any basis for suggesting that artificially fluoridated water poses health risks.

I am sure that research will emerge in future that will either confirm or deny the case made by the Senator. I do not have an opinion on the matter personally but, while I am open to persuasion, I must take on board the advice of the Health Research Board. The board began the review in 2014 and completed it in early January. The reason it has not yet published a report is because it has been submitted for international peer review to ensure accuracy and objectivity. It is the intention to publish the report in April and when that happens I am sure that either the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, or I will come to the Chamber to debate this topic again. Once the report has undergone the peer review process, I am sure it will contain the necessary objectivity. I am also sure that our attitudes towards fluoridation will change in the future in one direction or other. I acknowledge that the Senator is passionate about this issue and accept that she believes what she is saying but we cannot make decisions on this unless they are recommended to us by the people we have charged to prepare the report.