One of the leading newspapers in Britain, 'The Sunday
Telegraph', carried on its front page, November 24, 1996, a report headed,
'Colgate pays out for teeth ruined by fluoride'. The following news comes from several articles appearing in the Telegraph. and the Electronic Telegraph.
Sharon and Trevor Isaacs were given £ 1,000 to pay for sealing Kevin Isaacs' teeth when he becomes old enough to have that work done. He is ten years old. Kevin has been diagnosed as having dental fluorosis. The Isaacs family did not use fluoridated water or fluoride tablets. Kevin did not eat sweets. He had sometimes accidentally swallowed too much fluoride toothpaste, but the Colgate-Palmolive corporation had assured Mrs. Isaacs that it would do no harm. This is the first instance of a goodwill payment being made by a toothpaste manufacturer for damage from a fluoride-containing product.
A suit by more than 200 parents of children who have dental fluorosis has been filed in Great Britain. The case will be bolstered by newly declassified U.S. documents which show that as early as 1944 there was evidence that fluoride can cause confusion, drowsiness and listnessness. Dr. Mullenix commented on how Dr. Harold Hodge, a fluoride toxicologist had misled her about the harm that fluoride does to the nervous system. She is one of the authors of "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats" who was in London recently.
Sir Ivan Lawrence, Tory MP for Burton, was quoted as saying, "I think the evidence will continue to mount and there will be a ban in five or ten years." Sainsbury, a supermarket group, is considering including a warning label that swallowing fluoride toothpaste could cause dental fluorosis. Some supermarket chains may start selling fluoride-free toothpaste.
Kevin seems to have been a very unusual boy if he didn't eat sweets.
According to a letter from the Tualatin water district, the pH of the water in Portland, Oregon will be raised to 7.5 in January, 1997. The purpose is to comply with Environmental Protection Agency rules for reducing lead and copper in waste water. Lead must not be greater than 15 parts per billion. Cities which get their water from Portland's water system will be affected. These include Tualatin, Gresham, Tigard, Durham and parts of Beaverton.
Lead gets into the water from corrosion of lead-based solder used to join copper pipe, brass, and chrome-plated brass faucets. Copper comes from corrosion of soft copper tubing used for connecting faucets. In 1986, Congress banned the use of lead solder containing greater than 0.2% lead and restricted the lead content of faucets, pipes and other plumbing materials to 8.0%.
The editor contacted a spokesman for the Portland Water Quality Office on August 6, 1996. He said that the pH of Portland's water was currently 6.8 to 7.0 and would be raised to 7.3 in January, 1997. Caustic soda would probably be used for raising the pH. He went on to say, "It's a matter of perception. If you don't tell them they won't notice. If you didn't tell people you wouldn't get any complaints." See the related editorial, Fluoride or pH enhancers: A Medical Detective Story.
Now this message from David Kennedy, DDS:
"This headline 'Colgate pays out for teeth ruined by fluoride' appeared on
November 24, 1996 in The Sunday Telegraph English language international
newspaper. They quoted Phyllis Mullenix, PhD the former Harvard
Toxicologist on the 50 year government central nervous system effects
cover-up. I've got the Video! Filmed at the Clark University Fluoride Forum
this excellent forum turned the Worcester, MA fluoridation question in to a
landslide of no votes almost 2 to 1 against fluoridation.
"This video so affected the Worcester area that surrounding towns are now
beginning to question the wisdom of putting a well known poison in the
public drinking water.
"100 minutes of dynamic video edited for play on your local cable access
station or on your local evening news. I urge all of you, who care about
ending the fluoride scam, to order the 1/2" VHS tape for your own use and
then give it to the local cable station for them to show it to all your
neighbors. It is going to knock your socks off.
"$30 donation to Citizens for Safe Drinking Water requested.
"If you are in the media or cannot afford the cost I'll send you one free of
charge if you promise to return it right away.
"The professional commercial quality 60 minute 3/4" tape costs us $35 to
reproduce and will provide excellent video on any commercial station. After
the first 55 minutes there is a break so that the station may play only the
first 60 minutes if desired. If they want the second 40 minute segment of
public questions and statements then you should order both the 60 minute
and 40 minute 3/4" tapes. (Both segments are included on the 1/2" VHS)
Since the 3/4 format is only 60 minutes long both segments won't fit on one
tape and we produce these by specific request only and it will take a day
to send.
"I am told that most cable stations will play the 1/2 inch video format with
no question but the local commercial stations may insist on the
professional 3/4" size tape."
(from the UK Councillor)
After listening to claims of "safety" and "efficacy" of fluoridation from health authorities around the UK, the National Pure Water Association recently offered £ 25,000 to the first person who could show that any one of thirteen statements by the Association were untrue. The NPWA keeps abreast of the published scientific literature on fluoridation.
The list of statements in the challenge included:
The International Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR) is a scientific society that publishes a quarterly journal, Fluoride. The ISFR also holds regular conferences, the last being in late August in Budapest, and the preceding two in Beijing, China in 1994 and in Kyoto, Japan in 1992. The next conference is tentatively slated for Bellingham, Washington, in the summer of 1998. Researchers are invited to join ISFR. Applications for membership should be sent to the Secretary, Professor Gene W Miller, Biology Department, Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84322-5305, USA.
The headline read in Newsday, "Fluoridation ends on Long Island"
A portion of Long Island has been getting water from a company that supplies
water to New York City. Since NYC is forced to fluoridate, the water company
fluoridated all its customers to make life easier for them.
People have been lobbying for years for it to stop. But this year a new
water authority was created with a new water board and they figured out a way
to stop fluoridating the people who lived in Nassau County.
County Executive Tom Gulotta and other legislators came to urge the
board to stop fluoridation. Phyllis Mullenix came from Boston to speak.
Dr. Schacter and Dr. Hinden, a dentist, came from 1 1/2 hours upstate to speak
as well. Only a couple of elderly dentists and a lady with outdated and
wrong information came to speak in favor of fluoridation. Another younger
dentist spoke with consumer reports in his hands.
There were three hearings in two locations to accommodate everyone. The
Nassau County Dental Society, which made a resolution to initiate a
fluoridation mandate bill, was conspicuously absent. It appears that they like to do their work behind closed legislators doors where no one can object
and no one knows what they are doing.
Postings on the dental-public health list serve
indicate
that fluoridationists were successful in their assault in
Maine.
These four, and sixteen other health organisations, "have formed an alliance calling for action to reduce tooth decay in those parts of the country where it is still unacceptably high." They indicate that they want to see the number of people receiving fluoridated water (at present about 10% of the population) doubled or tripled. To quote their news release: "All the members of the alliance want existing
legislation amended to make it mandatory on water companies to fluoridate water when requested by local health authorities. They point to substantial support in Parliament for fluoridation, with a British Dental Association survey of MPs
finding a two thirds majority of them in favour of this public health measure.
The call for action comes after a NAHAT survey which shows that, following local consultation with the public, over fifty health authorities have asked water
companies to add fluoride to water but have had their requests turned down."
Under the existing legislation water companies have discretion over whether to accede to fluoridation requests from health authorities, and they have proved much more responsive to public opinion. Health authorities' board members are nominated, not elected, so they can ignore public opinion with impunity.
Although health authorities are supposed, indeed obliged by law, to consult the public before deciding on fluoridation, these consultations are in practice merely perfunctory. There is no obligation on them to heed what they hear, or to refrain from asking loaded questions (such as, "Are you in favour of fluoridation if it will prevent tooth decay?") which are likely to give them the answer they want.
An article published in the November, 1996, issue of Fluoride, the
quarterly journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research,
reviews the scientific studies that link the effects of fluoride put into
water supplies as a "tooth decay preventative" to those of synthetic
chemicals such as dioxins, 2,4,-D, DDT, "Agent Orange" and DES (
Diethyl-stilbesterol).
All of these have the potential, in low doses, to cross the placenta and
injure the developing fetus in the uterus. This action has been shown to
cause brain damage leading to behaviour disorders and a lowered IQ and to
cause lowered sperm counts by interfering with the action of the male
hormone, testosterone. (1,2)
In the same issue of Fluoride, a scientific study from China (3)
shows that
children living in an area with high fluoride in the water supply have
lower IQ's throughout life when compared to those living in a low fluoride
area. In all cases, mothers of these children lived in the same areas during
pregnancy.
The author of the review, Richard G. Foulkes, M.D., of Abbotsford,
British Columbia, Canada, concludes with: "The message is clear. Action
is required immediately." Such action must be inclusive; that is,
removing both the offending synthetic chemicals and water fluoridation from
the environment.
Contact: Dr. R.G.Foulkes
______________________________________
The Sustainable Energy and Economy Network of the Institute for
Policy Studies and the International Trade Information Service have
released a report, entitled "The World Bank's Juggernaut: The
Coal-Fired Insudtrialization of the Indian state of Orissa." This
91-page report, released in September, 1996, extensively documents the
environmental, social, public health, and labor impacts of World
Bank-financed coal-fired power development and power sector
privatization--a model the Bank has called "highly relevant," and one
it intends to duplicate in at least four other Indian states.
Among the reports findings:
For a copy of the report, send $8 (waived for countries in the South) to cover postage and handling to:
IPS
Make checks payable to IPS.
This information came from PeaceNet, a non-profit progressive networking
service. For more information, send a message to
peacenet-info@igc.apc.org
"'Furthermore, data collected by the National Institute of Dental Research suggests that fluoride in tap water reduced tooth decay rates among school children by only 18 percent, or about half a cavity per child. Additional analysis has shown that virtually no difference in tooth decay exists between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. And, for those who want fluoride, it is easily available through other sources, such as treatments from a dentist, fluoride toothpaste, and pills and rinses.
"'By giving local elected officials authority over this decision, this bill allows the wishes of the people to be best represented in a matter affecting their health and the health of their families,' said Assemblyman Weisenberg."
Dental Fluorosis Is Cause of Legal Action
December 10, 1996
Portland, Oregon to add Sodium Hydroxide to Water
December 3, 1996
Fluoridation Video Available
December 2, 1996
£ 25,000 Reward Unclaimed
November 27, 1996
Not a single claim was received by the National Pure Water Association -- not even from dentists.
International Society for Fluoride Research
November 27, 1996
Home Rule in Naussau County, New York
November 25, 1996
Fifth Anniversary of the National Register of Children with Dental Fluorosis Celebrated
November 19, 1996
A meeting to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the founding of the National Register of Children with Dental Fluorosis was held yesterday in a room at the House of Commons. Two MPs participated. Two children with dental fluorosis were in the audience. One of the authors of "Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats" also participated.
Fluoridation referendum fails in Worcester, Massachusetts
November 11, 1996
The citizens of Worcester, Massachusetts have voted against fluoridation in their recent referendum. According to the Boston Globe of 11/7/96 the vote was 62% opposed to 38% in favor.
New campaign in Britain "to unblock the fluoride impasse" threatens rapid
expansion of fluoridation.
November 7, 1996
The British Dental Association (BDA) has issued a news release in conjunction
with the British Medical Association (BMA), National Association of Health
Authorities and Trusts (NAHAT) and the British Fluoridation Society (BFS). This
announced that a "new campaign to reduce dental health inequalities by extending water fluoridation" was to be launched on the 4th of November at the House of Commons.
Fluoride Linked to Low IQ, Sperm Count
Nov 4, 1996
Fluoride joins dioxins, 2-4-D, DDT, DES and "Agent Orange" as
another cause of fetal brain damage and fertility problems.
Canada (604) 850 3171
U.S.A. (360) 758 7133
References
World Bank Development Policy Linked to Fluoride Pollution in India
November 4, 1996
As reported in the misc.activism.progressive newsgroup:
attn: Orissa Report
1601 Connecticut Ave., NW
5th Floor
Washington, DC 20009
USA
Assemblyman Weisenberg Gives His Reasons
October 15, 1996
New York State Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg (D-Long Beach) was the sponsor of the Home Rule Bill which was signed into law on July 2, 1996 by Governor Pataki. The bill gives the right to make the decision to fluoridate or not to fluoridate to elected officials instead of county and state health department officials. His reasons, as reported in a recent newsletter, were as follows:
"'No individual or population should be involuntarily medicated. Especially when the full effects of fluoride are not known,' said Assemblyman Weisenberg. 'Studies have raised questions about possible health risks associated with fluoridation, such as: hypersensitivity, mutagenic damage, fertility problems, susceptibility of individuals with kidney insufficiency developing systemic fluorosis, dental fluorosis and increased risk of skeletal fluorosis.
The spill was reported in the Derry Journal in Northern Ireland. Pure water campaigners pointed out that this is but one of many instances which show that fluoridation is not completely safe. Terry Moore, representing the National Pure Water Association's Derry Branch, said that the way officials downplay accidents like this is a "creative approach to fluoride public relations." Twenty-five of the twenty-six district councils and all four of the health councils in the North part of Northern Ireland oppose a new fluoridation plan.
A spokesperson for PA Mandatory Fluoridation Alert said that this is the kind of accident that they said could never happen and it shows that fluoridation is unsafe. See the related story, Pennsylvania Legislature Considers Statewide Mandatory Fluoridation Law.
Hydrofluorosilicic acid is also known as fluorosilicic acid or fluosilicic acid. It comes as a liquid and so it is easier to add to water than crystalline sodium fluoride and fluorosilicate. All of these chemicals are derived from pollution scrubbing operations. A common source is the processing of phosphate rock to make phosphate fertilizers. The rock also contains fluoride, silica and traces of heavy metals such as uranium, radium, radon and lead. When the phosphate rock is treated with sulfuric acid, silicon tetrafluoride and hydrogen fluoride gases are given off. These gases pass through scrubbers and react with water to form hydrofluosilicic acid (H.F. Denziger, H.J. Konig and G.E.W. Kruger, "Fluorine Recovery in the Fertilizer Industry: A Review," Phosphorous and Potassium #103, Sept/Oct, 1979, pp.33-39).
The recent verbal volley between the regulars on this list-serve and the anti-fluoride zealot Frances Frech has been interesting to observe but has reconfirmed, in my mind, the need to remind dental public health scientists that they should not waste their precious time and energy dealing with these health terrorists. As you can see from Frech's propaganda, none of them know a damn thing about what they are talking about. Besides, Frech and the like make it up as they go - there is no science behind their false claims. From their perspective, that is all right though, because their twisted minds have accepted the notion that it is o.k. to lie, slander, libel, exagerate, misquote, inaccurately quote, quote out of context, and invent "truths" at the drop of a hat, in their misguided attempts to frighten the public into not accepting fluoridation. If members of this list serve would only "surf" the net occasionally and read some of their materials, you'd see what kooks they all really are. [By the way, did you all know that they now have "incontrovertible evidence" that fluoridation was conceived by Hitler as a form of mind control to take over the world. Seems funny that Hitler was gone and the Third Reich defeated long before fluoridation was ever introduced in the first city. Hey, but what the heck - who cares about being accurate (or logical) when your busy scaring people. Being an antifluoridationists is sort of like being one of those pathological types who screams "fire" in a crowded theater - the goal is the same - panic the public.]As you all are aware, there can be no legitimate debate about fluoridation because there is no scientific controversy about it - it remains safe, effective, efficient, and cost-effective, regardless of what Frech and the other antifluoride ilk say about it. 135 million people drink fluoridated water in the U.S., with another 10 million drinking water that has natural fluoride levels at optimum levels. And the number is growing rapidly as we continue to fluoridate additional cities, despite the failed attempts of the fluorophobics. The world total approaches 300 million. 14,300 U.S. water systems fluoridate the drinking water for 10,500 cities, some cities since 1945. [And sorry Frances, but fluoride is fluoride is fluoride when it comes to fluoridation of drinking water.] The one principle that needs to be remembered is that antifluoride cultists will not be dissuaded by the truth. Fluorophobics are not deserving of your efforts. Let them spew their garbage, ignore them, and go on with your discussions as if they weren't here. They have their own anti-health homepages from which they can pollute the Internet with their illogical propaganda. You won't eliminate quackery by debating with quacks - debating them here only gives them an additional forum from which to publicize their twisted logic. Spend your energy fluoridating communities. The best way to beat the antifluoride zealots is to fluoridate their water supply. If they don't want to drink the water, then they can buy bottled water or move to the country. The rest of their community wants and deserves fluoridation.
A few weeks ago, it was decided that fluoridation would not be discussed on the dental-public-health list-serve anymore. Mr. Easley had this to say:
"Don't you see what a bottomless pit you create when you decide to become a censor of speech and a wet blanket regarding the expression (and discussion) of controversial ideas?"I may not agree with the substance (or mode of delivery) of the claims made by Frech and others practicing pseudoscience, however it becomes more difficult for me as a dental public health professional to deal with their opposing views during the legitimate practice of my profession within the political, legal, and administrative venues where I am required to operate if this PUBLIC forum for discussion of their issues is denied me and others. By shutting off discussion, you eliminate the opportunity to educate other dph practitioners in the methods of antifluoridationism, as well as insulate them from a valid discussion of the consequences of ignoring the fluorophobics' activities."
House Bill No. 2855 was introduced on July 17, 1996. It is awaiting approval by the House Consumer Affairs Committee chaired by the Honorable Kathryn W. Durham. A review of the bill admits that some people are "allergic" to fluoride. PA Mandatory Fluoridation Alert calls attention to the following quotations from Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride and Fluorine, USDHHS/ATSDR, 1993, showing that some subsets of the population are particularly vulnerable to adverse health effects from exposure to fluorides:
POPULATIONS UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE: Existing data indicates that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and it's compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with deficiencies in calcium, magnesium and/or vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems (p. 112).Fluoride in the drinking water may increase the risk of old men and women breaking bones (p. 6).
The weight of evidence from these experiments suggests that fluoride added to water can increase the risk of hip fracture in both elderly women and men . . . If this effect is confirmed, it would mean that hip fracture in the elderly would replace dental fluorosis as the most sensitive endpoint of fluoride exposure (pp.56-57).
Within the text of HB 2855, there are no provisions to offer warnings to those above mentioned persons who might suffer adverse effects from fluoridated drinking water. With establishing dosages of substances such as fluorides, it is also the legal and moral duty of each committee member, sponsor and/or legislator of the bill to insure that these populations susceptible to adverse health effects from ingesting fluorides are warned and continue to be warned of any harmful effects that might occur from exposure to fluorides.
Here is the position statement prepared by GAAF:
The anti-fluoridation constituency consists of a vast army of dedicated lay people, scientists, medical professionals and public officials who recognize that fluoride has never been scientifically proven safe or effective and that, indeed, a huge body of scientific data, which includes U.S. government, state and university research studies, implicates fluoride and fluoridation in serious human health problems, such as cancer, increased hip fractures, osteoporosis, learning disabilities and IQ deficits. The ADA itself has acknowledged the danger of fluoride poisoning in its warning to mothers to allow their children only a pea-sized amount of fluoride toothpaste, and the recent lowering of supplemental fluoride dosage recommendations for children. Moreover, ADA does not dispute the fact that the incidence of fluoride poisoning in the form of mottled teeth is rising along with dental costs for capping that far exceed the costs of cavities. Dentists are clearly reaping the benefits of fluoridation.A packet of information is available from GAAF for $2.00.
The campus computer system is being used to harass the editor of Fluoride Issues. The editor's workstation is bombarded with unwanted computer programs. A written complaint was sent to Dave Johnston, the System Administrator, on January 18, 1996 after these unwanted and disruptive computer programs were noticed at the beginning of the Spring 1996 Semester. Dave Johnston referred the complaint to Campus Police. Officer White was assigned to work on the case. Officer White said in a telephone conversation with the editor on February 23, 1996 that he didn't know where to get the computer expertise to stop the disruptive programs.
On March 30, 1996, the editor made computer screen print-outs which provided information about an identifiable suspect who is using the Internet to send unwanted computer files which are associated with the disruptive programs. This documentation was sent with a written complaint to the Campus Police on April 3, 1996. Since that time, the Campus Police have not responded. As of this writing, Officer White was not available for comment.
The campus has several computer labs. The disruptive computer programs began in the BOT lab. On February 9, 1996, the System Administrator for the BOT lab told the editor that he knows nothing about how the disruptive programs get into the computer system and knows nothing whatever about what can be done about it.
In the Fall Semester of 1995, someone kept using the editor's return e-mail address to send hate mail all over the Internet. The hate mail was sent from the BOT computer lab. The Netscape browser has a window for sending e-mail anonymously. The sender can write in any return e-mail address he or she wants.
The hate mail was carefully investigated. The investigators knew it couldn't have been sent by the editor because he was in his business marketing class while someone was sending hate messages. There may have been more than one person doing it. No one was ever caught.
There is no obvious reason for this harassment. Fluoride Issues is probably a bit controversial, but only one professor has voiced negative opinions. A professor in the Business Administration Department showed the Fluoride Issues Web site in class and then after class told a story to the editor that went like this:
Years ago, I took a class from a teacher who began every lecture by reading something negative about fluoridation. Then he would always say that next thing you know, they'll be putting castor oil in the water. After listening to him talk this way every morning, the students got sick of hearing anything about fluoridation.On November 29, 1995, the professor got on to the subject of Fluoride Issues and said sharply, "An evangelist should be careful what he says." Another time he said sternly, "Do you know who is looking at your Web page?"On February 8, 1996, the editor asked the professor what motivation someone might have for harassing the editor and the professor did not give a direct answer to the question.
The Grand Rapids Michigan Citizens Opposed to Fluoridation has changed its name to Grand Rapids and Southwest Michigan Citizens Opposed to Fluoridation to reflect the fact that some of its members live in the suburban area around Grand Rapids. This Grand Rapids group was organized in September, 1995 as a response to news of the unveiling of a marble monument to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of fluoridation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
On September 15, 1995 pro-fluoridation dentists attended a box luncheon at the monument. A spokesperson for the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation referred to the unveiling of the fluoridation monument as, "this horrifying sham of an event."
Dr. Art Ulene, the keynote speaker at the luncheon, was irate at the presence of anti-fluoridation protesters. He called them a "vociferous minority that refuses to deal with facts. We cannot allow ourselves to sit back quietly while 113 million Americans do not drink fluoridated water. . . We must fight their slogans and warn the parents in non-fluoridated places what they are doing to their children." There was a caption under a picture of him which said, "Fight the anti-fluoridationists." Carol Kopf, a prominent anti-fluoridationist, went over to Dr. Ulene and discussed the concerns of the protesters. He did not directly answer certain specific questions she tried to ask him, but agreed to welcome her writing to him. He compared fluoridation to vaccinations and acknowledged some people would be harmed but whatever is beset for the majority is the way to go. Carol Kopf wrote to him later and reports that Dr. Ulene answered with the same hard-line "script."
On March 3, 1996 Belfast City Council voted against fluoridation by 22 votes to 7. As part of the Public Consultation they listened to presentations by the health board and the National Pure Water Association, who oppose fluoridation.
TONY LEES, a practicing dentist and a member of the National Pure Water Association made the Opposing presentation to the Councillors two weeks ago. Welcoming the result, he said: "People believe - wrongly - that the entire membership of the British Dental Association is in favour of fluoridation. There are a great many of us who are against putting this stuff into the drinking water. Fluoridation is out-dated 1960's technology, which doesn't address the cause of tooth decay. Dentists are still dealing with tooth decay in fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. The very best advice any dentist can give is: Cut down on sugar and sugar products, eat a sensible diet - and clean your teeth properly! Oh, and see a dentist for regular check-ups!"
Jane Jones of the National Pure Water Association said: "These results reflect the views of Councils all over the United Kingdom. We are grateful to the Belfast City Councillors for giving Tony Lees the opportunity to speak to them and delighted for the people of Belfast."
In response to accusations that opponents of fluoridation are "novices and scaremongers" Ms Jones said: "We're used to it! Let the record speak for itself. We have many science, medical and dental professionals among our members whose own clinical work and scientific research backs up the huge body of scientific evidence from all over the world showing the dangers of fluoride and water fluoridation. Frankly, the real scaremongers are the fluoride promoters who parrot that it is safe and effective. If someone chooses not to look for evidence of harm they will not find it. But there are also those who know about the dangers who choose not to speak out. And there are those who know about the dangers of fluoridation who actually state publicly that it is SAFE. THAT'S scary."
Other results this week in the United Kingdom include:
Newtownabbey - voted 16 against fluoridation and 4 for it. Fermanagh - voted 17 against fluoridation and 2 for it.
This morning I opened the paper.... the City Council had met without public comment yesterday morning on the issue of possibly adding two unsuccessful petition drive initiatives onto the ballot. They chose one, and TURNED DOWN FLUORIDE! So the pro fluoride people have lost at the water bureau, the signature campaign, AND the City Council! They may try to go back to the water bureau again, BUT LITERALLY, QUITE LITERALLY, we've won this "Round!"
Maybe you've heard, but there's some good news from Eugene, Oregon, USA. The pro-fluoride folks here only got about 5,000 signatures... which is about 3,000 signatures SHORT of getting it on the ballot, and their deadline has passed this week. Yes, it's a temporary victory, but it gives us time to educate folks. And we need to celebrate every victory along the way, even the small ones. I received a lot of information from all over the USA, very rapidly, from anti-fluoride folks, all for free. I've looked at it all and read a lot of it. I read the "dilemma" book. I'm very grateful for the information and support, and I tried to get that out in letters to the editor and in a column I wrote. I've made it available to anyone who wants to look at it in our office.
The nearby town of Tacoma, Washington had to discontinue fluoridation in 1992, as reported by Wini Silko, because it was raising lead levels in the water. In July, 1992, just before they quit fluoridating, testing showed that Tacoma's water had 32 parts per billion lead. A month later, the lead level had dropped to 17 parts per billion. Nine months after fluoridation was stopped, the lead level was back to its normal .004 parts per billion.
Other towns around the country, especially those with a lot of older homes, have found that adding hydroflusilicic acid to the water causes corrosion of metal pipes. When the water in Thurmont, Maryland was tested in 1992, some houses had 50 times the EPA limit for lead which is 15 parts per billion. Before Thurmont stopped fluoridation, the average lead level was twice the limit. After stopping fluoridation in May, 1993, the average lead level was 9.26 parts per billion. By November, 1993, still without fluoridation, the average lead level had declined to 7.11 parts per billion, according to an article in the Frederick Post, February 3, 1994. Stopping fluoridation may be the fastest and most economical way to reduce lead levels in public water systems.