Reactions to new federal and state guidelines calling for lower fluoridation levels are coming in thick and fast. Several cities in Oregon have already taken steps to do so.
Albany is just the latest. Read it here: Albany lowers level of fluoride
The Albany water system has lowered the degree of fluoridation in line with new guidelines, Public Works Director Diane Taniguchi-Dennis has announced.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency said last week that too much fluoride apparently was causing mild tooth spotting among a few children. It recommended that water systems limit fluoride to no more than 0.7 parts per million or milligrams per liter.
Albany said earlier this week it was awaiting new guidelines from Oregon public health officials. On Wednesday, Dennis announced: “We have adjusted our fluoride target dose to 0.7 mg/l in accordance with the regulatory guidance we received from the Oregon Department of Health today.”
Among mid-valley cities that fluoridate their water, Lebanon and Sweet Home also said they were reducing their levels in line with the EPA report.
Now, if they would just wise up and get rid of it entirely, we’d all feel a lot better. Remember, there’s tons of fluoride in our food, our mouthwash, our toothpaste, at our dentists’ offices….
Furthermore, Portland and Eugene, among other Oregon cities, do not add fluoride compounds to their drinking water.
Recent financial information that came in with our utility bills this week includes this nugget:
Operating Loss – $103,355. This means the Water department spent $100,000+ more money than they took in during fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.
Since fluoridating our water costs $36,000, this means if we repeal the section in the city charter requiring them to do that, they would only have lost about $67,000 last year.
Let’s do this – save our water department from losing even more money! Repeal the fluoride section!
Substantial pressure appears to be building for hearings on failure to notify the public earlier about CWF harms. Angered by the foot-dragging, Ted Turner’s daughter, an Atlanta-based environmentalist and mother, is prominently calling for official explanations.
“In 2006 a National Academy of Sciences report designated kidney patients, diabetics, infants, and seniors as “susceptible subpopulations” that are particularly vulnerable to harm from ingested fluorides.”
“A 1999 statement about fluoride supplements in the journal Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology predicted fluoride trouble ahead: “It is only a matter of time until a case is brought that gets public attention. The risk is that noticeable fluorosis will be perceived by the public as a toxic consequence of fluoride ingestion — which, arguably, it is — and there will be a reaction against all uses of fluoride…”
Local residents throughout the U.S. and elsewhere are following up on the recent Associated Press story [see Jan. 7 post on this blog] relating that U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has proposed a change in recommended fluoride level to 0.7 milligrams per liter of water and that the EPA will review whether the maximum cutoff of 4 milligrams per liter is too high.
Here’s an urgent note from our Fairbanks, Alaska correspondent, Douglas Yates:
“All added fluoride should be removed from Fairbanks water. The evidence of harm is overwhelming and the feds did not release the full story. Nothing about harm to infants; nothing about people with CKD; nothing about thyroid damage. Please say so [in letters to the editor of your local paper]. It’s important. Policy makers are keeping a head count. If you want a community that uses science to make public decisions; that does not mass medicate with unknown dosage; that reciprocates your respect, then speak your mind here. People are listening. It’s time.”
EPA Union Testimony on Fluoride
Statement of Dr. J. William Hirzy,
National Treasury Employees Union chapter 280
Before the Subcommittee on Wildlife, Fisheries and Drinking Water United States Senate
29 June 2000
Posted at http://www.fluoridealert.org
Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this Subcommittee to present the views of the union, of which I am a Vice-President, on the subject of fluoridation of public water supplies.
Our union is comprised of and represents the professional employees at the headquarters location of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington D.C. Our members include toxicologists, biologists, chemists, engineers, lawyers and others defined by law as “professionals.” The work we do includes evaluation of toxicity, exposure and economic information for managements use in formulating public health and environmental protection policy.
I am not here as a representative of EPA, but rather as a representative of EPA headquarters professional employees, through their duly elected labor union. The union first got involved in this issue in 1985 as a matter of professional ethics. In 1997 we most recently voted to oppose fluoridation. Our opposition has strengthened since then.
Summary of Recommendations
1) We ask that you order an independent review of a cancer bioassay previously mandated by Congressional committee and subsequently performed by Battelle Memorial Institute with appropriate blinding and instructions that all reviewers independent determinations be reported to this Committee.
2) We ask that you order that the two waste products of the fertilizer industry that are now used in 90% of fluoridation programs, for which EPA states they are not able to identify any chronic studies, be used in any future toxicity studies, rather than a substitute chemical. Further, since federal agencies are actively advocating that each man woman and child drink, eat and bathe in these chemicals, silicofluorides should be placed at the head of the list for establishing a MCL that complies with the Safe Drinking Water Act. This means that the MCL be protective of the most sensitive of our population, including infants, with an appropriate margin of safety for ingestion over an entire lifetime.
The News-Register, the local Oregon newspaper read by Mac Citizens for Safer Water, today picked up the AP story citing dangers of fluoridated city water, that also has gotten national play on radio, Internet and television.
The local paper’s story noted local interest in McMinnville, one of just a few large cities in Oregon that still fluoridates its drinking water. The news story begins:
Feds eyeing tighter fluoride limits
By MIKE STOBBE — AP Medical Writer
ATLANTA – Fluoride in drinking water – credited with dramatically cutting cavities and tooth decay – is also causing a spotting condition called fluorosis is an increasing number of children.
Though cosmetic in nature, and typically detectable only to dentists, the condition was instrumental in leading the federal government Friday to announce plans to lower the recommended range for fluoride in water supplies. If approved following a series of hearings, it would be the first such change since 1962.
In McMinnville, Water & Light currently maintains a range of 0.7 to 1.2 milligrams. It aims for .08 to .09 milligrams and generally hits that target.
On at least one occasion last year, the concentration hit Oregon’s allowable limit of 1.2. However, Water Superintendent Robert Klein said that was via a manual system replaced in April with a more accurate automated system significantly reducing fluctuation.
Portland, Eugene and Bend are among Oregon’s major cities that have fluoride-free water. Bend has had an ordinance expressly forbidding addition of any fluoride to its municipal water for decades.
A section in McMinnville’s city charter directs the city’s utility to add fluoride to municipal water. Allegedly beneficial dosages have regularly declined in the past 50 years, while no one denies that children living in fluoridated communities also get cavities.
Fluorosis – streaking and blotches on teeth – is dismissed as a minor problem, but numerous medical and scientific professionals have questioned that attitude and called for more carefully-controlled studies of effects of even small amounts of industrial waste-based fluoride compounds (not natural calcium fluoride), on behavior and health of the entire population.
The McMinnville section must go!
Here’s astounding news today: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says there has been too much fluoride put in drinking water. About 40 percent of children in fluoridated communities have streaking or spots on their teeth, the AP reported.
ATLANTA (AP) – Fluoride in drinking water – credited with dramatically cutting cavities and tooth decay – may now be too much of a good thing. Getting too much of it causes spots on some kids’ teeth.
A reported increase in the spotting problem is one reason the federal government will announce Friday it plans to lower the recommended levels for fluoride in water supplies – the first such change in nearly 50 years. [emphasis added]
What they don’t ask is: what is this doing to our bones? What do those streaks mean? Many medical professionals believe that fluoride makes bones more brittle. Back in the 1950s serious overdoses of industrial fluoride in streams on a Troutdale ranch made people and livestock very ill.
The resulting lawsuit was just the beginning of a spate of legal activity in Oregon.
Fluoridation of community water supplies continues to be highly controversial. The controversy can be easily resolved by stopping mandatory fluoridation and allowing individuals to consult with their medical caregivers regarding proper fluoride dosages.
It’s time to get the fluoride out of our drinking water!