Citizen offers research to city council - council ignores evidence and votes in fluoridation

Letter to the Editor

2/19/03

Fellow Citizens of Port Angeles,

We live in a world gone mad; or at least a city. Tuesday February 18th the Port Angeles City Council voted six to one to fluoridate city drinking water. The only dissenting vote said he only wanted more time to look over material.

I personally delivered several weeks ago to the City Managers office for distribution to council members recent information showing minimally that fluoridation of water does not prevent tooth decay. I hand delivered a copy to our acting Mayor. Here is one example of the information type:

The July 2000 peer-reviewed cover story of the Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) just reminded every dentist in America that ingestion of fluoride does not provide any significant reduction in the incidence of tooth decay - that any beneficial dental effect is as a result of topical application directly to the tooth;

What could be more clear and timely than that? If anyone doubted the information presented they could go to the original source journal first hand and discover that fluoride ingestion does not prevent tooth decay! At least it should have given pause and stimulated a desire to dig deeper into the issue to discover the large body of growing knowledge confirming the same assertion.

Other statements about the dangers of water fluoridation can be found at www.keepers-of-the-well.org From that site I copied and provided the council with information such as what you see below :

Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
1010 University Avenue # 52, San Diego, CA 92103
(800) 728-3833 (619) 281-1578 Fax
greenjeff@cox.net www.Keepers-of-the-Well.org davidkennedy-dds@cox.net

Request for Due Diligence -- Fluoridation 2002
For more than fifty years, decision makers charged with the responsibility of protecting the water supply for entire communities have been confronted by advocates of fluoridation with assurances that the public policy of mass medicating citizens with a substance that can not be removed by simple filtration has been fully reviewed and all questions of safety and effectiveness resolved. Once again we hear that poor children are not swallowing enough fluoride that promoters claim would otherwise eliminate tooth decay, completely ignoring that fluoride is already present in higher concentrations than fluoridated water in sodas, fruit juices, cereals, teas, and, because of fluoride-based pesticide residues, on such produce as tomatoes, lettuce, potatoes, cabbage, and raisins. In 1991, government documents reported that non-fluoridated communities already receive the original goal of 1 milligram of fluoride a day, with fluoridated communities receiving 3 to 7 milligrams a day __ far exceeding the margin of safety, and causing permanent scarring of the enamel of at least one tooth of 66.4% of children in fluoridated communities.

What the fluoride promoters will not reveal to their targeted legislators and City Council Members, or even their unsuspecting well-intended supporters:

The August 17, 2001 MMWR (CDC) report, despite its touting of fluoridation, included: "The prevalence of dental caries in a population is not inversely related to the concentration of fluoride in enamel, and a higher concentration of enamel fluoride is not necessarily more efficacious in preventing dental caries."

"The laboratory and epidemiologic research indicates that fluoride's predominant effect is posteruptive and topical and that the effect depends on fluoride being in the right amount in the right place at the right time;"

The American Dental Association and American Academy of Pediatrics have revised their recommendations for controlled-dose fluoride which restricts a doctor from prescribing fluoride to a child of 6 months to 3 years of age to the amount found in one cup of fluoridated (at 1 ppm) water - none to an infant (meaning that as a public policy fluoridation mass medicates at a higher expected dosage than a doctor in a non-fluoridated community can prescribe);

More valuable source information I provided that was perhaps ignored by the city council was from Dr. Russell Blaylock who is a board certified neurosurgeon and a Clinical Assistant Professor of the Medical University of Mississippi. He also serves on the editorial board of the "Medical Sentinel," which is the official journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.

In Dr. Blaylock's book "Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life," chapter four, he elaborates with documentation, how fluoride use can cause: dental & skeletal fluorosis, genetic damage, abnormal brain development, hypothyroidism, damage to DNA repair enzymes, increased risk for osteoporosis and cancer (bone, oral, bladder & lung) and, reduction of male fertility. For your convenience and reprinted with permission of Health Press, also with a clear understanding of limited use (that the chapter should not be reproduced again), I have included the entire chapter with the citation-listing appendix.

How can anyone ignore these statements? Was it the grant money and the glossy presentation that comes with it? Maybe even the psychosocial effect of not wanting to be the outsider voting against the rest of the heard. Maybe both or maybe more.

No matter I will be removing the fluoride from our drinking water and anyone else who would like to do the same can contact www.bigberkey.com.

Sincerely,

R. Plaske
Port Angeles, Wa.

P.S. Sequim your water supply is next.

 

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]

Back to Current Edition Citizen Review Archive LINKS Search This Site