Mayor Sam Adams this afternoon tweeted his support of a plan to fluoridate Portland’s water—giving the formerly-quiet-but-now-very-loud political push the three Portland City Council votes it needs to become official.
‘
Adams’ endorsement of fluoridation comes a day after Commissioner Nick Fish, despite being on vacation, came forward with his own. So much for questions about political support raised by pro-fluoride frontman Randy Leonard only a week ago when the Oregonian broke news that a diverse coalition of health advocates, working with top political consultant Mark Wiener, was planning to go public with the controversial idea.
The announcement by the mayor leaves Dan Saltzman, also on vacation, as the only commissioner not to give some kind of statement or signal about his intentions. While Amanda Fritz hasn’t yet said whether she favors a council vote to fluoridate Portland’s water, she has said she’s support a referendum on the issue.
That may, of course, be what happens no matter how the council votes this fall. It wouldn’t surprise anyone if fluoride opponents, like they did 30 years ago, answer by collecting signatures for a ballot measure that overturns the council’s will.
Fritz—no matter what she decides—also could face some electoral fallout this fall in her tight-fought re-election runoff race against State Representative Mary Nolan. Nolan told me this morning she fully supports fluoridation and doesn’t agree that the council should farm out the decision to voters.
“This is the kind of decision we expect city council members to make,” Nolan says. “The facts are very clear on the public health issues, and on the science issues, and, what I’ve not heard, on issues of fairness and equity for all the residential water users” in neglected parts of the city like East Portland.
Granted, it’s not Nolan’s vote—since, if she won this fall, she wouldn’t take office until January. But the conundrum facing Fritz presents a good political opportunity. If Fritz votes against fluoride, Nolan can say she’s not honoring principles of equity. But, then, if Fritz votes for fluoride, she risks alienating some very motivated fluoride foes. They won’t vote for Nolan, so they might just sit out the race altogether.
Whenever fluoride comes up for a vote, it’s going to be a long, long hearing.
Can anyone honestly tell me without any spin why we have a need to add fluoride to water. and I don’t want any bullshit like “but, teh children”.
Don’t modern toothpastes already have enough as it is, and can’t you get fluoride treatments at a dentist?
TIME FOR CRAZY PEOPLE TO SAY CRAZY THINGS ABOUT FLUORIDE.
Not trying to be crazy Graham, just honestly curious.
Hurray! Dumping industrial waste into one of the cleanest municipal water supply’s in the country, while paying paying millions of dollars to do so is a great idea. We’ll see you in the fall you fucking assholes.
http://youtu.be/OcHNYenN7OY
It’s unfortunate that there can’t be serious discussions about this. Every story I see about Portland’s possible flouridation immediately has “Here come the tinfoil hats”-type comments. Back in the 50s, the anti-flouridation crowd was definitely quite nutty, and the whole “precious bodily fluids” Dr. Strangelove argument was a reality, people actually thought it was a Communist plot.
That does not, however, mean that opponents of flouridation in today’s world are still crazy conspiracy-theorists. There are legitimate studies and respected health and environmental organizations, such as the National Academy of Sciences and the Federal Department of Health and Human Services questioning the safety of how much flouride is getting put into the water.
I posted this link in yesterdays blog on this, but I’ll put it here again:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace…
I think I support putting fluoride in the water, but I wonder: why not add anti-depression medication too? Or vitamin D? It gets complex.
Yep, it’s a long one……
Gee, what could possibly be the harm with the practice of water fluoridation? I mean other than the fact that it’s force medicating the population without their consent, and without regard to the case history or medical circumstances of any of the people who are exposed to this “medication.”
Fluoride is a cumulative toxin linked to irreversible dis-coloration of teeth in 1 out of every 3 children, dental fluorosis, severe pitting of the enamel in children, stiff joints, bone abnormalities, bone cancer, is a potent hormone disruptor that effects the thyroid, and let’s not forget it can lower the IQ in children.
The fluoride added to drinking water is in fact NOT sodium fluoride! It is not some carefully controlled, pharmaceutical grade substance but hydrofluosilicic acid, a byproduct of phosphate fertilizer manufacturing.
Fluoridation chemicals are allowed to contain trace amounts of lead and have been found to increase children’s blood lead levels.
The EPA has NO mandate for water fluoridation and fluoridation chemicals are NOT regulated by the FDA or the EPA, but a private agency called NSF (National Sanitary Foundation, International), who is utterly un-accountable as a regulatory body and allows for numerous impurities within the fluoridation chemicals including arsenic and lead.
Fluoride can move into ground water and the run-off may enter streams and disrupt life cycle of salmon, a particular concern here in the northwest.
America is in the minority of countries that allow for fluoridation of the water, and in many countries that have no industrial, or monetary incentive to fluoridate have found links to the toxic health effects of fluoride. Some countries with high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in their water from mineral deposits have been obligated to install fluoride removal plants, like India.
But no, it’s all just a kookie conspiracy theory that was brought about by Dr. Strangelove. There’s just so much to be gained, consequence free, by spending millions of dollars to fluoridate our water like the rest of the country. You certainly shouldn’t look into the voluminous amount of research about the fluoridation process by going to http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluoride-dang… or watching this video of former Senior Vice President of EPA Headquarters Union testifying before the Senate about fluoride way back in 2000: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRLz4a7lDVM
Hurray Sam Adams and City Council!
Nolan just lost a vote. More than one, I’ll bet.
As a vegan i am totally against this. Just like meat-eaters can eat ANYTHiNG a vegan can eat but vegans cant eat everything a meat-eater eats so is this issue with fluoride in our water. Besides that, why waste more money to add this to our water? Already Oregon as a whole is wasting TOO MUCH money on other trivial things and overpaying people be it with taxes or unemployment and now fluoride in water? it doesnt add up! Both sides of this argument can “prove” whatever with studies and/or scientific evidence, bottom line is: WHY FORCE OTHERS TO DRiNK/EAT SOMETHiNG THEY DONT WANT TO?! “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.” @d8ob
1 in 5 kids in Oregon have rampant dental decay – seven or more cavities.
^^^”1 in 5 kids in Oregon have rampant dental decay – seven or more cavities.”
i.e., 1 in 5 kids in Oregon have sloppy bitches for parents.
(though, to their credit(?), they probably can’t afford dental care for their kids or themselves anyway, which obviously doesn’t help matters.)
What happened to the optional flouride treatments I received at school as a kid?
When I was a kid I had sodium fluoride tablets. Oregon has an extensive health plan for children. Why aren’t these civic groups working through that system and their networks for much better children’s dental health? Instead they are taking the easy and much less effective way out by pressuring the City to take on the expense of a weak program. Fluoridation is effective for adult teeth development from age 6-16. What percentage of our population is in that group? What percentage of tap water is used for drinking by that group?
What is the impact of fluoride in the water for our brewing and distilling industry? What is the impact on our tech industry making solar, chips and wafers? On salmon?
Fluoride in tap water is not very popular in Europe and Japan. This is a public health idea, over 60 years old, that needs to be thoroughly reexamined. Yes it is easy, yes everyone can pat themselves on the back for doing it. But frankly Portland can find a better world class solution.
If parents would quit giving kids soda pop and Lucky Charms cereal then maybe their kids’ teeth would not look like they are forming gang signs. Simple.
I am not a tin hat kind of lady. When my spouse talked to me about Fluoride months ago, like many, I was doubtful it could be bad for you & not helpful in preventing dental problems. So I did an experiment by stopping the Rx Fluoride paste I had been using for over1 1/2 years. In 5 months of no fluoride & increasing healthy foods, my enamel issues were resolved. Drugs, regardless shouldn’t be put in our water, and doing so doesn’t address the real issue- nutrition. We deserve a choice. I’ve started a campaign. Please learn more about both sides & decide. Once our water is treated it stays for 5-10 years.
http://nofluoridepdx.blogspot.com/
People keep focusing on children, but this is just as much of a move to help the homeless keep their teeth. All of the “just brush your teeth!” or “just use mouth wash!” arguments don’t really work when you’re talking about Portland’s vast homeless population. There’s a reason why free dental service at shelters is in such demand.
This is complete bull sh*t! In Oregon you can choose to get an abortion, or Dr. assisted suicide. But you don’t have the choice to drink non fluoridated water?! I’m sick of hearing about ‘the poor children’, Christ, most mouthwash has fluoride in it, and its used topically (as intended), its cheap, and can be purchased with food stamps! If those parents would just buy that instead of the box of “all natural” sugar drops the rest of us wouldn’t have to suffer.
Since Mayor Adams and Commissioners Leonard and Fish have publicly announced to the news media and others their intentions to vote for this action, are they in violation of any requirements to have public input before they make their decisions? It seems to us that they, all three should exempt themselves from voting on this issue. How can one fulfill the very essence of “promoting citizen engagement” when you announce your decision before the first person gives their testimony? This corrupts the very concept of open government, we should do away with public input if members of the council can announce their support or rejection of an issue before there is any input from the public. There is a second question that this issue has raised. The cost of building a plant for the delivery of fluoride to our water system is around $5,000,000. There is an added cost of $500,000+ annually to keep pouring fluoride into our water system. Is this a good use of our limited resources? Just asking!