Portland Mercury on Twitter Portland Mercury on Facebook Portland Mercury on Instagram

Narrow Search

Other Searches

Sorting by Posted Date

Comment Archives: stories: Feature

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Thank you for pointing that out - but I think that is the cost of the fluoride itself, not the cost of the "7.6 million dollar fluoridation plant" and all the other city add-ons.

Unfortunately, we will not know until we get our quarterly ever-increasing bill in the mail.

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by altogetherPDX on 05/07/2013 at 9:28 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

@altogetherPDX - It says in the article above - an average of $3 per household per year (AKA less than a tube of toothpaste). No one is hiding that information.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Adam Caniparoli on 05/07/2013 at 9:21 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Why was this rushed through? The citizens who placed this on the ballot acted in good faith, using the democratic process. It was supposed to be voted on in May 2014, after a reasonable scientific and financial review. We don't even know how much this is going to raise our water bills. I would guess a lot more than a family's year supply of fluoride toothpaste.

All else aside, a "yes" vote on this is a yes vote for graft and corruption.

4 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by altogetherPDX on 05/07/2013 at 8:52 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Spindles - How many polio or smallpox epidemics have there been in the United States in recent history?

My father clearly remembers the last polio epidemic before the Sabin and Salk vaccines came about. If you think some people are scared of fluoride, think about the chance to catch a deadly or disabling communicable disease just by being out in public.

It's because of anti-vaxers like you that measles and whooping cough are making comebacks in the United States; you are destroying the herd immunity that protects people who cannot be vaccinated because of infancy or allergy, or who have compromised immune systems (people with AIDS, organ transplant recipients).

6 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Yinzer V on 05/07/2013 at 8:16 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

"a little variation in patterns/grasping at straws/crazy might make you distinguishable"

I'm sorry, tcraighenry, that posting links to scientific papers at the National Institute of Health, showing links between fluoride exposure and lowered intelligence in children makes you think that I'm crazy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

But, perhaps there's some other way for you to satisfy your inner self-righteousness than by risking my 8 month old daughter?

Also, does anyone know whether it's safe to garden with fluoridated water, or are there vegetables that concentrate the fluoride to unsafe levels?

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by rainfade on 05/07/2013 at 8:15 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

@Tom Servo1 - Iodized salt has been a huge contributor to the drop in goiter and cretinism. Fluoridation of salt could be practiced here, like it is in most of Europe, to reduce dental caries.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Yinzer V on 05/07/2013 at 12:08 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Why isn't fluoridated salt used instead of water?

1) It would not be in our water. Good for fish and water supply.

2) In Europe (sans Ireland) they use salt because they believe that fluoride in water is an outdated process, overkill, and expensive.

3) Fluoridating salt is cheaper than 6-8 million to put it into our water supply.

I hope the Mercury reads and responds to the option of Fluoridating Salt. Cause this makes sense for both sides of the issue.

5 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Tom Servo1 on 05/07/2013 at 12:03 AM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

The 2010 Water Quality Report, also showing zero arsenic, is here - http://tinyurl.com/c4jcmce

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Yinzer V on 05/06/2013 at 11:36 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Philomath water does not have 46.5 mg/L of arsenic in it. That would be 46.5 ppm, when the EPA limit for arsenic in drinking water is 10 ppb.

Did you actually test the Philomath *water* for arsenic from the taps? You tested the undiluted supplements, which would be highly diluted when put into the water supply.

Here is the City of Philomath 2011 Water Quality Report - showing ZERO arsenic. http://tinyurl.com/cjyvwr5

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Yinzer V on 05/06/2013 at 11:18 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Homer - then why are so many on the anti-side so conspiracy minded? For instance, the water-guzzling Spindles has said things about vaccinations that would find themselves at home with the things that are being said here. For instance:

"[V]ax-heads really show their true colors on threads like these. They are aggressively willing to stand by big government and the nakedly corrupt pharmaceutical industry with such a fervor and blind faith. Progressive indeed."
-Spindles

Sause: http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/10/07/hey-stupid-fucking-anti-vaccine-baby-killers-stop-killing-our-babies#comment-10291250

4 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Pridge Wessea on 05/06/2013 at 11:03 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Portland Mercury, I am disgusted and ashamed that you call yourselves Portland's best alternative weekly.
This article is insane. It is a load of misinformed opinions, based on nothing but propaganda. Do your research before you print such obvious falsities. .
Want to actually be informed? Go to fluoridealert.org to find well researched evidence of why fluoridating drinking water doesn't actually work to lower cavity rates.
This is an industrial byproduct waste that we are talking about, not a pharmaceutical grade "safe" addition to water. It is a fact that fluorosilicic acid is regulated by the EPA as a toxic waste. Anyone go to middle school? Remember the Precautionary Principle, err on the side of intelligence and don't dump something in our water that may really be bad for us. It doesn't matter that there are studies that show that in safe doses it may be ok for us. There is a mountain of evidence that points towards doubt as to the effectiveness of fluoride in our water, and there is a mountain of evidence that points towards serious health risks of ingesting it. The CDC even says that the best and most effective use is topical.
I thought we lived in a democratic city, where people can choose what medication they take. If you vote yes, you are agreeing to install a compulsory medication program. Just because so many other cities in the countries do it does not make it right. Portland can be an example of a more sane way to live.
Kids need less chemicals in their bodies, not more. We need less chemicals in our watersheds, not more.
Thus begins my boycott of the Mercury. Goodbye and thank you for nothing.

7 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Yoko Silk on 05/06/2013 at 9:42 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Well written, well researched. CWP: the truth hurts, doesn't it?

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Tooth Truth on 05/06/2013 at 9:41 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

This is for you Yinzer V!
If you want to see the Philomath water analysis showing 46.5 mg. of arsenic per liter of water (the same concentration that will be added to Portland's water) I got a copy, scanned it, and posted it to my personal blog. You are more than welcome to check it out. http://inarasart.blogspot.com/2013/05/anti…

0 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Christina Rachelle Carnoy on 05/06/2013 at 9:22 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Oh sorry rainfade. It's just that you're playing that same old broken record. Honestly though, a little variation in patterns/grasping at straws/crazy might make you distinguishable

3 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by tcraighenry on 05/06/2013 at 5:23 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

So go on and name these corporate interests. Also do you know what a PAC does and is for? The clue is in the acronym.

3 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by tcraighenry on 05/06/2013 at 5:20 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

So link to that instead of your (?) Crappy YouTube video.

3 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by tcraighenry on 05/06/2013 at 5:18 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Clean Water Portland gets 11+ times as many more individual donations *from Portland* as Healthy Kids Healthy Portland.

Individual donations from Portland:
CWP: 32.1%
HKHP: 2.7%

Clean Water Portland has ten times more grassroots in support base than Healthy Kids Healthy Portland.

Donations less than $100:
CWP: 17.0%
HKHP: 1.6%


Source:
OR Secretary of State (4/24/13)
http://www.oregonvotes.org/pages/cand/inde…
Analysis by Seth Wooley. Independently verifiable.

5 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by MBr on 05/06/2013 at 4:37 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

And considering HKHP is using an auto-reporting service that files all of their transactions at literally the last minute before their deadline, for the least amount of transparency of course, we don't actually know just how much HKHP has in their coffers at present. We do know that over 95% of their campaign contributions are from corporate special interests and PAC's however.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Spindles on 05/06/2013 at 4:36 PM

Re: “The Sanest Arguments Against Fluoride...”

Actually, tcraighenry, I haven't. And, I only see one other comment about the links between fluoride exposure and children's lowered intelligence in this thread.

But, you're entitled to your wild-eyed conspiracy theory.

I'm curious though. What do you have against intelligent children?

2 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by rainfade on 05/06/2013 at 4:27 PM

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC

115 SW Ash St. Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204

Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Production Guidelines | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy