Dear Watchers

Dear Watchers:

Many communities, elected officials and water agencies are under tremendous pressure to fluoridate their water supplies, with medical and corporate interests funding the proposals and staff time to attempt to “sell” fluoridation to the public. Fluoride is a toxin, not a nutrient. It is regulated as a drug by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and as a contaminant by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The addition of fluoride, which has been linked to a long list of health issues, to our water supply is an insane idea that puts our health and safety at risk. These proposals to fluoridate do not provide each citizen with a choice about whether or not s/he would like to ingest a drug whose safety has been called into question by the results of many peer-reviewed research studies.

Fluoride has been linked repeatedly to increased bone fractures and bone cancers in academic peer-reviewed journal articles. Fluoride has also been linked to a long list of other health issues impacting multiple organ systems. Many countries, including most of Europe and Japan, have outlawed the use of fluoride in water supplies due to health risks.

There are many existing sources of fluoride contamination in our bodies—from toothpaste to industrial pollution, Gore-Tex to Prozac, and from fertilizers to treated wood, rat poison and nuclear weapons. In 1936, the Journal of the American Dental Association stated: “Flouride at the 1 PPM concentration is as toxic as arsenic and lead.... There is an increasing volume of evidence of the injurious effect of fluorine, especially the chronic intoxication resulting from the ingestion of minute amounts of fluorine over long periods of time.”

Water fluoridation has not been shown to decrease tooth decay in a number of reports and research studies in many countries, including the U.S. Data from the World Health Organization showing the same declines in tooth decay in countries with and without fluoridated water since the 1960s. In a study done in Australia in 2004, pro-fluoridation dental researchers were unable to show any difference in the permanent teeth of children who had lived all their lives on fluoridated water versus those who had drunk rain or bottled water.

The Union of EPA Scientists, as well as many other medical professionals and organizations, supported by a multitude of research studies from around the world, have come out against fluoridating drinking water. Dr William Hirzy, EPA Union Scientist Vice-President, stated, “We hold that fluoride is an unreasonable risk. The toxicity of fluoride is so great and the purported benefits associated with it are so small—if there are any at all—that requiring every man, woman and child in America to ingest it borders on criminal behavior on the part of local governments.”

Fluoride is a component of industrial waste, generated by the fertilizer, aluminum, glass, steel and nuclear weapon industries—and is expensive to dispose of—thus industry is motivated to find “good” uses for it. The fluoride compounds that are typically used to fluoridate water supplies often contain lead, arsenic and other heavy metals and toxic compounds.

According to several research studies, including the Sept. 2004 issue of the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, fluoride can be toxic to other animals, including fish and aquatic organisms. As with other toxic chemicals, it is very likely that additional negative impacts to other organisms, including humans, will be discovered with time.

I believe that if people want access to fluoride because of a belief that it reduces dental cavities (although research does not support this belief) then it should be provided on an individual basis through topical treatments or by prescription, not by medicating the entire population with uncontrolled dosing. By uncontrolled dosing I’m referring to the fact that the person who drinks four glasses of fluoridated water each day gets four times the dose of a person who drinks one glass of water a day. This doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when you’re talking about a substance that is regulated as a drug.

Fluoride is a toxin that all of us should be seeking to avoid, and at the very least, this toxin should not be forced upon the population as a whole. For me, the issue is choice. If others want to use fluoridated toothpaste, get topical fluoride treatments at their dentist’s office, or prescription fluoride tablets from their dentist—go right ahead. I simply believe that we all should have a choice.

Additionally, and I feel sort of silly stating the obvious, but no drug (or magic bullet of any kind) will ever take the place of good dental hygiene (tooth brushing, flossing) and a healthy diet (i.e. a diet high in fruits and vegetables and low in processed foods and sugar). If the concern is for dental health then we should be focusing on the aforementioned, not some quick, easy fix. Unfortunately, dental hygiene and a healthy diet require a lot more attention and care than simply drugging the populace—but they also offer much in the way of wide ranging health benefits.

While in Whatcom County, the issue of water fluoridation is being put to a vote, in Skagit County, the County Commissioners, under pressure from the Washington Dental Services Foundation and Washington State Dental Association, are contemplating mandating that the Skagit Public Utilities District (PUD) fluoridate the water without a public vote. Now tell me—are dentists and their associations/foundations really interested in reducing cavities, and thus their income, or are there other forces in play here?

There are a number of excellent articles and Web sites where you can learn more about this important issue, including the following:

Articles:

•“Fluoride Follies,” Donald W. Miller, Jr., MD, July 15, 2005, http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller17.html.

•“Fluoridation Revisited,” Murray N. Rothbard, January 1993, http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard85.html.

Web sites:

•http://www.fluoridedebate.com

•http://nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/NTEU280-Fluoride.htm (EPA Union’s Web site)

•http://www.keepersofthewell.org/Introduction.html

•http://www.fluorideaction.net

•http://www.noforcedfluoride.org (Bellingham’s No Forced Fluoride Web site).

Dear Watchers:

I served on the Birch Bay Village homeowners association board of directors several years ago, along with Mike Kent. If his actions there are any indication of what he would be like as a County Council Representative; the community needs to be forewarned. It was not at all evident that he was working for the benefit of the community. He often tried to control decisions himself, rather than sincerely participating in team decision-making with the board of directors. When the board faced important issues where community notification and input was warranted he would try to find ways to preclude broader participation. This was especially evident when the issues involved things which might adversely affect the community’s marketing image. He needed to be continually reminded of the state’s open meeting laws, and the property owners’ legal rights to information. He also did not hesitate to use his influence to benefit business associates and clients who had real estate listings with him. Electing Mike Kent to represent the 3rd County Council District would be opening the door for him to practice his “Special Favors for Special Friends” politics on a much larger scale.

There’s a place in this world for salesmen like him who serve for-profit interests; but it’s not on the Whatcom County Council.

Dear Watchers:

Experts do not agree on the benefits or risks of fluoride. Many studies find fluoride reduces decay and many find fluoride increases decay. Some claim fluoride is safe, others claim fluoride is a poison. Confused?

As a dentist who promoted water fluoridation for 20 years, wrote many fluoride prescriptions and gave samples and fluoride treatments, I no longer support water fluoridation.

My nutrition education places fluoride as a drug, not a nutrient like vitamins. The absence of fluoride does not cause any disease. The FDA regulates systemic (swallowed) fluoride as a prescription drug (requiring a narcotics license) and topical fluoride with warnings such as, “do not swallow,” “if more than a pea size is swallowed, contact a poison control center.”

A “pea size” of toothpaste contains 0.5mg of fluoride ion, the same amount of fluoride found in two glasses of fluoridated water. If the FDA regulated water, the FDA would probably require a warning “do not swallow this water.”

We are already getting too much fluoride. Even without water fluoridation, too much fluoride is common, as seen in dental fluorosis the white or brown spots on teeth. Look in the mirror, you may have fluorosis. Where is the fluoride coming from and who pays for damaged teeth?

Grapes, tea, mechanically de-boned beef, and processed potatoes are examples of foods high in fluoride. Recent EPA increases in pesticides (7 mg/Kg increased to 180 mg/Kg) and new (’04 increased ‘05) post-harvest fluoride fumigants, (up from 0 ppm to as high as 900 ppm) places fluoride in almost all foods far higher than 1 ppm in water.

We all agree mother’s milk contains the right amount of fluoride for an infant, usually under 0.01 ppm. The breast “filters out fluoride.” Formula mixed with fluoridated water provides dangerous levels 100 to 200 times mother’s milk. If the water is fluoridated, who will pay for bottled water for infant formula and educating young families?

Who will monitor fluoride intake ensuring total intake is not too much? What is the process for stopping fluoridation?

Fluoridation is not “safe.” Do a “google” search for words such as fluoride, fluoride and cancer, fluoride and obesity, fluoride and thyroid, fluoride and kidney, fluoride and enzymes, fluoride and increase of dental decay, fluoride and retardation, fluoride and intelligence.

We are already getting too much fluoride and higher concentrations are coming in foods. If you personally want more fluoride: get a prescription, eat foods high in fluoride, but please do not swallow toothpaste or fluoridated water.

Bill Osmunson DDS, MPH

Aesthetic Dentistry of Washington

Aesthetic Dentistry of Lake Oswego

Director, ICDS

bill@teachingsmiles.com

Dear Watchers:

Rare as it is for me to write in favor of a candidate for public office, it’s rarer still to find a candidate of such quality and promise as Carl Weimer, who is running for Whatcom County Council—District 3. Carl’s qualifications for office are truly outstanding, but it is his promise as a leader on issues like sensible growth, economic vitality for farms and local businesses and clean water that set him apart as someone who really understands the problems that real people are facing and has a clue as to what can be done to resolve them with our best interests in mind.

I trust Carl to do the right thing by ordinary people, as he has done repeatedly with every venture with which he has been associated. Like managing the nonprofit business, RE Store, which recycles usable materials on a shoe-string budget, yet consistently meets its payroll while growing—talk about a challenging business accomplishment!

Carl’s current job as executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust was born out of his voluntary and very effective involvement in resolving the 1999 Olympic Pipe Line disaster right here in Bellingham, resulting in stronger federal and state legislation.

I hope voters will pay attention to what Carl says, and compare that to what he has actually done in preparation for this office. Empty rhetoric is not what Carl’s about—he’s the real deal! Please join me in enthusiastically supporting Carl Weimer for County Council.

Googling County Council Candidates

Dear Watchers:

Something interesting happens when you Google County Council candidates Carl Weimer and Mike Kent. A search for Carl Weimer reveals hundreds of Web pages that talk about his experiences at the Pipeline Safety Trust, RE Sources, the RE Store and SAFE Bellingham. A similar search for Mike Kent shows several pages with expensive real estate listings and not much else. Kent seems like a nice enough person, but I question his ability to make unbiased decisions as a councilmember, especially since so much of his financial backing comes from developers. On the other hand, Weimer’s record shows a lengthy service to the community on matters such as safety and the environment. Weimer will get my vote this fall.