IF FLUORIDE FAILS at the ballot box later this month—an incredibly distinct possibility, and something of a tragedy for Portland—it won’t be because of the kooks and the conspiracy theorists who’ve spent decades stoking panic about a safe, tested, and effective health measure.
That ugly strain of paranoia is a well-known fluoridation killer, and maybe it helped kill fluoridation the other three times Portland said no. But this time? If anyone deserves blame, it’ll be your neighbors—your very regular and very well-meaning neighbors.
The simple and reasonable case for fluoridation—which the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definitively urges for the prevention of tooth decay in children and adults—is drowning under a hailstorm of counter-arguments that look, sound, and seem rational. Except that they aren’t.
And it’s understandable. We’re scared of junk science that we’re too busy to tear apart. And we’re worried about one of the things that Portlanders hold at the center of our civic identity: our water. So we rage about lobbyists and we put up signs that tell people not to do something that practically every other major city in America has done, some for decades and none with any sign of catastrophe.
Never mind that many of you who might be leaning toward “no” won’t be the ones who suffer: it’ll be poor kids whose lives are more complicated than “why don’t they just brush more?” Make no mistake—those who vote “no” will be voting against the class of people Portland is famous for supporting.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Portland can still make a rational choice come May 21. We’re not gunning for a Pulitzer Prize, like the Tampa Bay Times, which won journalism’s top award last month for a series of editorials staunchly defending fluoridation and debunking its myriad myths. But we can do our part for Portland.
Because those sane-sounding anti-fluoride arguments you’ve been turning around in your head? They’re wrong.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
1. CAVITIES AREN’T THAT BIG A DEAL IN PORTLAND.
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
Neither side likes cavities. They hurt like a bitch and make kids cry. And considering the amount of sugar in everything these days—yikes. But are masses of children in our community actually suffering?
Anti-fluoride groups claim that (1) any dental health epidemic in Portland is over-stated, and (2) that the only real solution for improved dental health is more access to health care.
But there IS a problem. A state survey of public schools found that 50.7 percent of kids in Multnomah County have already had a cavity (this number is higher among lower-income kids). Worse, about 20 percent of kids have to tough it out and leave their dental decay completely untreated.
Even if water fluoridation isn’t a miracle cure, it definitely helps. According to the CDC, it can effectively prevent tooth decay. Bacteria in your mouth cause tooth decay. Bacteria make acid. That acid eats the minerals on the tooth’s surface. Fluoride (a mineral), helps revitalize that surface. Having frequent, low-level contact with fluoride keeps that process regular. And given that it’s politically unlikely taxpayers would support any major outlay for health care costs, why not pony up the couple bucks a year it’ll cost for fluoridation (really, just $3 for the average household)? Because it will actually help.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
2. OUR WATER IS PURE! WHY POISON IT?
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
For some skeptics, including groups like our local Sierra Club chapter, it’s not about the science of dental care and what seems like a dizzying array of studies saying incrementally different things about fluoride’s supposed sins and blessings. It’s about water. Portland’s water—unfiltered and drawn straight from the snow-kissed runoff that feeds the primeval Bull Run watershed.
So why in the world would we want to foul up such purity by squirting in an industrial chemical, fluorosilicic acid, better kept in some kind of hazmat vat? Because we already do. And most likely you can’t even tell. The only “pure” thing about our water is the myth we’re clinging to.
Upstream, where animals live and don’t give a hoot about our crinkled noses, Bull Run water picks up fallen leaves, piss, shit, and even, occasionally, corpses. Because, you know, nature.
Then, as it makes its way inside Portland Water Bureau’s “Headworks” water-intake facility, the city deliberately adds more nasty bits. Chlorine and ammonia help disinfect the water. And sodium hydroxide—AKA lye, an alkaline industrial salt so toxic you can’t touch it—balances the water’s pH levels to keep it from wearing out our homes’ lead and copper pipes.
David Shaff of the water bureau says tours are rarely allowed at the Headworks. When they are, the presence of 36 tons of liquid chlorine means visitors must carry respirators and be advised of potential escape routes.
“What you get in your tap is a manufactured product,” Shaff says. “It is not pristine water out of Bull Run.”
(Oh, PS: Portland’s water already has a trace amount of naturally occurring fluoride.)
_________________________________________________________________________________________
3. SO WHAT. OUR BEER AND COFFEE WILL TASTE BAD.
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
No. They won’t. But Portland is a beverage mecca, so we get that this is a crucial point: Let’s not eff up the water supply, because nobody wants beer or coffee that tastes like a pool. Luckily, fluoride is tasteless and odorless. Blind taste tests have shown no humanly distinguishable difference between fluoridated water and distilled water. Alex Ganum of Portland’s Upright Brewing wrote a letter to the Oregonian last year reminding us that if you drink beer from Corvallis or from outfits like Astoria’s Fort George Brewery, you’ve already had fluoridated beer. The US Department of Agriculture keeps a list of nationally distributed foods and beverages bearing fluoride: among them Coke and Pepsi products. No, you couldn’t tell. Best was a brewery in Utah that put the thesis to the test after its water was fluoridated, according to Bon Appetit. Once more, no one could tell the difference.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
4. BUT WHY BOTHER IF FLUORIDE WORKS TOPICALLY AND DRINKING IT IS USELESS?
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
On the off chance you’re five years old and reading this paper, first sterilize your eyeballs and then ingest some fluoride. The American Dental Association notes that a reasonable level of fluoride, ingested while teeth are forming, “is deposited throughout the entire surface of the tooth and contributes to long-lasting protection against dental decay.”
Which is a long way of saying that while topical applications work well, drinking fluoride is hardly useless.
“We know that fluoride is effective when you consume it and it works systemically, and we know that fluoride is effective when it’s applied topically,” said Dr. Philip Wu, a Kaiser pediatrician speaking at a recent event for the political action committee (PAC) running Portland’s pro-fluoride campaign, Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland. “The beauty of water fluoridation is it does both.”
The point is: If you ingest it as a child, there can be huge benefits. Ingestion doesn’t pay off as much for adults or people with adult teeth. Citing a 1990 study, the CDC points out that the amount of fluoride secreted in the saliva of people in fluoridated communities is negligible—probably not enough to ward off decay. But the organization also says the mere act of drinking a glass of fluoridated water raises the fluoride in your saliva for an hour or two. This, according to the American Dental Association, “continually bathes the teeth, providing a reservoir of fluoride that can be incorporated into the tooth surface to prevent decay.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________
5. BESIDES, FLUORIDE IS SO TOXIC IT WILL MAKE YOU FALL APART.
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
Here’s the thing: At elevated levels, fluoride is toxic. In high enough levels, so are vitamins D and A. Too much oxygen can take you out. No large amount of any chemical or compound or element is going to be blithely accepted by your system.
Here’s the other thing: The symptoms and conditions that fluoride skeptics often point to aren’t a problem at the 0.7 parts per million (ppm) level Portland’s proposing. Many of them aren’t clearly a problem at all.
The rundown of maladies you’ve probably been warned of by now is too long to fully document here, but here are a few.
Bone weakness: If you ingest excessive amounts of fluoride over long periods, you’re more likely to have broken bones—or even a nasty bone thickening called “crippling skeletal fluorosis.” But once again, no one’s talking about excessive amounts of fluoride.
A 2001 study in China, published in the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, found “the prevalence of overall bone fractures is the lowest for populations living in areas of approximately 1 ppm of fluoride.” That’s more than Portland’s proposing. The study, by the way, also found broken bones increase in places where fluoride amounts are very low.
“But our hips!” skeptics might protest. They’ll point you to a 1992 study that suggested fluoride led to increased hip fractures in Utah’s elderly. Other studies found differently. A 1993 study from Canada concluded “fluoridation of drinking water has no impact, neither beneficial nor deleterious, on the risk of hip fracture.” A Minnesota study the same year concurred.
Cancer: There’s just no concrete evidence fluoride causes cancer. People may reference a Harvard study that suggested fluoride could inspire higher rates of bone cancer in boys—but even the study’s authors cautioned the need for further research. Another study found “no significant association between bone fluoride levels and osteosarcoma risk.”
As the American Cancer Society points out, “The general consensus among the reviews done to date is that there is no strong evidence of a link between water fluoridation and cancer.”
Dental fluorosis: This is a change in the appearance of teeth that can occur when still-forming teeth are exposed to fluoride. Again, it’s associated with higher-than-optimal fluoride levels. At its worst, severe fluorosis involves brown stains on weakened teeth. That takes a great deal of fluoride exposure, though. Much more common, says the American Dental Association, are very mild cases involving hard-to-notice white flecks on some teeth. It comes down to being thoughtful about how much fluoride your young child ingests.
Under-active thyroid, calcium-filled pineal glands, weakened sperm, insomnia, skin rashes, etc.: What’s that they say about proving a negative? Any discomfort can and will at some point be linked to fluoride exposure.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
6. BUT DOCTORS ARE DIVIDED ABOUT FLUORIDE, RIGHT?
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
Some dentists and medical professionals do oppose fluoridation. Some, like Portland dentist Jay Harris Levy, will speak eloquently—uninterrupted for many minutes—on a slew of studies and the mass toll they feel fluoride’s having on society. But there’s hardly a schism. These folks are in the vast, vast minority.
Most of the groups listed as supporting anti-fluoride PAC Clean Water Portland are environmental and neighborhood organizations. Oregon chiropractors and acupuncturists also are opposed. Contrast that with the groups backing Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland: a litany of local and national dental, pediatric, and other health care organizations too long and comprehensive to list here.
Clean Water Portland makes a show on its website of having the support of “over 60 Portland doctors,” but the majority of those named are naturopaths, acupuncturists, and chiropractors—fields which help a great deal of people, but frequently come under fire from traditional medicine for lacking in scientific evidence.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
7. YEAH, BUT THIS ONE HARVARD STUDY—YOU KNOW, HARVARD!—SAYS FLUORIDE MAKES OUR KIDS DUMB!
- Illustration by Alex DeSpain
It’s hard to argue with the imprimatur of Harvard University, so terribly upstanding and legitimate. And that’s why, for months, this incredibly pernicious claim has continued to haunt our social media feeds and coffee shop banter.
The good news is you don’t have to argue with Harvard—just with the people who refuse to correctly interpret what Harvard actually said. Yes, there really was a study that looked at fluoride’s effect on children’s IQs. But, no, it didn’t find a definite link. And—super important—it looked at insanely high concentrations of naturally occurring fluoride outside the United States—concentrations far higher than the amount added to municipal water supplies.
So how did this get twisted around? Cracked.com, of all places, posted a delightful postmortem last summer. An anti-fluoride group wrote up the results and posted them on a part of the Reuters’ website that accepts press releases. A lot of people who saw “Reuters”—and reposted the writeup—never read the fine print.
The study also found its way to the Huffington Post. HuffPo can be pretty indiscriminate in whom it lets post on its pages. And in this case, the author was someone named Dr. Joseph Mercola. Mercola, according to Slate, is well known for his controversial views about fluoride. Also cell phones, vaccines, and psychic animals. But Mercola’s not merely a rogue doctor with a flair for the conspiratorial. He’s also an entrepreneur. With a whole mess of fluoride-free products for sale on his website.
And that’s not a conspiracy. That’s the truth.
“by the Mercury News Team”
Did you guys get a big fat check from Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland as well?
What a joke.
How about the argument that the government should not force the involuntary ingestion of ANY drugs, regardless of their health benefit? To me, this is the most important and most sane argument. I don’t care if fluoride is completely safe, and will make all our teeth better – it should not be the government’s mandate that I must ingest it in my water.
I predict mine will be the last comment on this thread.
Did voters take advantage of a policy that lets a sufficient number of interested people refer a vote by our elected representatives to the people? Is that election happening later this month? Did you register to vote in that election? Are you voting? Just asking. Because if this passes, it won’t be a “government mandate.”
LOL, this is terrible “journalism” (actually it’s an opinion piece but you guys style yourselves as legit journalists). On the IQ argument you link it to Mercola without talking to the lead author of the Harvard IQ study who says it’s critically important to consider total toxin load on brain drain, including water fluoridation. An article with similar claims of irrelevancy to water fluoridation in Kansas was debunked on his own website blog “Brain Drain”. Way to distract from the actual issues. I don’t have time to read your other arguments. Let’s hope you did a better job.
I did find from just scanning the subheads that you didn’t address what I think is the best argument. In the 70s and 80s there was an aluminum smelter on by the John Day Dam that was dumping 384kg of fluoride per day into the Columbia that was shown experimentally and via removal (the problem went away when they stopped dumping) to be causing a 50% Salmon die off.
The Portland treatment plant that dumps into the Columbia will not be able to remove any fluoride, and we know it actually concentrates it under many conditions (in others like with lots of rain water it can dilute it, too). On average, though, it will be dumping about 270kg of fluoride into the Columbia after processing based on basic flow rates.
While the concentrated fluoride dump will eventually be diluted downriver, the plume effects will be very similar to the plume at John Day, which could lead to a similar 50% salmon die-off. There’s a comprehensive 1989 paper on this from the Journal of American Fisheries. I invite you to read it, you can find it with any web search engine.
This is one reason why Columbia Riverkeepers, the Sierra Club, Food and Water Watch, and the Green Party all oppose fluoridation in Portland.
I also see you didn’t address the major ethical concerns of first do no harm and informed consent before medication.
None of the arguments you presented as the “best” arguments were what I considered major arguments against it. But arguing a strawman is an easy thing to do when you’re not actually paying attention and are just misinformed journalists writing against deadlines taking the talking points from one side and running with them as opinion.
Way to be a mouthpiece for political consultant Wiener the assfucker (your word from your 2010 article on him).
Salmon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYej_OgZHE
Let’s not kill all of them.
I’ve never lived in a city with a compulsory fluoridated water supply before; can someone explain to me the proper dosage I’m supposed to administer every day? How many glasses of water is too much or not enough, that kind of thing?
Thanks.
Denis, you’re being a tool. Please stop. A government mandate passed by a majority is still a government mandate.
I think you guys should just go ahead & close commenting riiiiiight now.
Another poorly researched article by a Portland publication. Instead of finding arguments against those who are against fluoridation, maybe that time would be better spent actually RESEARCHING this topic. If you HAD you would find what everyone who is against this has found, that fluorosilicic acid causes harm. No one should be put at risk because of an optional chemical put in the drinking water.
I’m glad to see the Mercury covering the underrepresented side of this debate, whether you agree with this article or not.
From Sierra Club:
“Sierra Club opposes fluoridation because it would degrade some of the purest drinking water in the world. Kids are already bombarded with multiple toxins from plastics, pesticides and air pollution.”
From Columbia Riverkeepers:
“What we add to our drinking water, we add to our rivers and our salmon. Fluoride is a toxic pollutant that harms salmon and other aquatic life. At a time when many families continue to rely on the Columbia’s fisheries as an important source of nutrition and employment, we are concerned about a new source of toxic pollution into the Columbia River.”
If only ALL OF EUROPE had scientists to show them what the smart, smart scientists at The Mercury know about fluoride in water.
What a joke. It would be funny if this issue weren’t so serious.
I just don’t get Portland. When people here vote against Fluoride, they are voting against the health of children. Guess what, you can get a water filter if you don’t want to drink the Fluoride. It’s much cheaper for you to do that, than it is for most people to afford prescription Fluoride supplements. I’ve got kids with dental issues that only started when we moved to this area. I had no idea that Portland DIDN’T have Fluoride in it’s drinking water until my kids started getting cavities (and we practice excellent dental hygiene). I am constantly amazed at how people here constantly vote against measures that help children–be it health, services or education.
I cannot express how disappointed I am with the Mercury. You cannot possibly watch the video below and agree that we need to spend over 6 MILLION dollars on something that does NOT work internally.
If we can simply look at what happened, it clears up everything.
1. A lobby group uses the 2007 OR “Smile Survey” data to declare a “dental crisis” and lobbies City Council ($9000) to fluoridate PDX. City Council obeys 5-0.
2. The 2012 OR Smile Survey comes out proving that not only do we *not* have a dental crisis but our teeth are better than the fluoridated areas in Oregon!
IOW, fluoridation of the water had no positive effect on
preventing cavities.
Note: it took two Freedom of Information Act requests(and REAL journalists) to get the data released before the vote. Someone did not want us to see it!
Before you vote please watch:
http://www.katu.com/news/problemsolver/Bef…
Did you forget about your own story? Maybe you are on HKHP’s list of people and orgs who were bought? Disgusted with you and I will boycott you forever and a day.
VOTING NO!
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-2056…
Yes, I can also write the words “there is no evidence” in big fat fonts. And they also won’t mean squat. This is sensationalist, cowardly garbage, dear news team. The news is that you’re bending over for some really nasty political interests. Enjoy being rode.
Can anyone suggest a good reverse osmosis filtration system that doesn’t cost an arm an a leg?
Brenna– That hip Randian argument you and others provide is unfortunately ridiculous. You aren’t mandated to drink tap water to begin with. You could buy bottled water. Or you could drink water that hasn’t been, oh I don’t know, collected and treated by public utilities already. Because you’re already doing that.
Which leads me to my second point: Water is a public resource managed by public institutions run by publicly elected representatives for the public good. The Government has also FORCED you to drink cleaner water using that FASCIST Clean Water Act and COERCED you to breath cleaner air using that COMMUNIST Clear Air Act. The Government is also forcing you to have police, fire, and military protection. How dare they! STATISTS! I fight fight Kin Jong Un all by myself, thank you very much!
You not caring if something is safe, beneficial, or economical but rather if it steps on paranoid/ill-informed people’s precious pinky toes is straight up ridiculous. What right is being tread on here? How is your life made worse by this? Oh right, consequences don’t matter! Just the ability to choose demonstrably inferior outcomes.
Can anyone suggest a good family dental care plan that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg?
I fully agree with brenna that this is the most logical argument against this issue. Anyone who doesn’t see the problem with that clearly hates freedom of choice and just freedom In general. You might need the government and general public to hold your hand through life but some of us are actually capable of making those choices for ourselves.
Very disappointed in you Portland Mercury. Why wouldn’t you do the people of this city a true service and offer a view of BOTH sides of the issue? Why not mention that the FDA has never approved fluoride supplements for the prevention of tooth decay? In fact, those that have been reviewed were rejected. The FDA also classifies fluoride as a drug. People rallied to gather more than 40,000 signatures in order to have the opportunity to vote on this issue. Clearly there is a large enough chunk of Portland’s population that feels the risks far outweigh the ‘possible’ benefits.
I have fluorosis. It occurred through ingesting the drinking water in the city I was raised in (Denver). As a developing child people started asking me if I drank a lot of coffee at age 8. I was first asked if I smoked cigarettes at age 10. All because of my teeth. Every dentist I have ever been to has stated this is incredibly common in numerous parts of the country that inject fluoride into their water systems. To get a sense of what what my grill looks like do a google image search of “fluorosis”. If Portland wants to help it’s kids smile like me… go nuts.
Alice is right. I hate freedom. That’s why I let the nanny state decide everything I do, like which side of the road I drive on, whether or not I can buy chemical weapons, or if it’s permissible for me to buy a wife or sell kids into slavery.
Who in their right mind reads this paper any way. I have lived here 57 years and have never picked it up. I will now get it to line my cats litter box with.
Excellent article. The only thing I take issue with is referring to the antifluoridationists as skeptics. When people repeatedly deny the scientific consensus, we should call them “deniers.” Same goes for climate change.
The Portland Mercury outdid themselves on this one. Great Job! A very interesting, easy to read and informative article on why fluoridation is effective, safe and right for Portland. We need more journalism like this. Fluoridation will reduce tooth decay in Portland residents by at least 25%. We are looking at healthier teeth, better breath and more people smiling. Good job Portland Mercury, I have a lot of respect for your newspaper now. #VOTEYES!
All people who drink fluoridated water eventually die. Every single one of them. This is an irrefutable fact. Think about it.
Also, Hitler.
Meh. Wish you folks had found something better to expend your energy on.
Also, did you just call my chiropractor and acupuncturist quacks? What, you’re medical scientists now?
Nm, I’m convinced. Everyone who drinks fluoridated water with get fluorosis, a life-threatening disease. I also have decided to not read papers whose news stories I comment on; having no idea what article you’re talking about clearly makes sense. Also, I’ve decided to build the CRC by myself; I don’t need the government holding my hand on that one!
@Seth, nothing new here. Also didn’t someone comment last week that The Mercury does not take sides.? It appears not to be the case, but I am not very smart I guess
Stand with Amber Richardson, stand agin’ the scary water chemicalators!
http://www.theonion.com/articles/my-baby-d…
Christopher Errante–this article reads like your HKHP FAQ–are you sure the merc didn’t plagiarize off you guys? Also, how much is Healthy Kids Healthy Portland paying you people to be on the internet all day?
How on earth does one interpret numbers on the order of a 50% tooth decay rate as not a dental health crisis?
Also, I’m glad I won’t see any more stupid comments from l_dingleberry.
“…a Harvard study that suggested fluoride could inspire higher rates of bone cancer in boys—but even the study’s authors cautioned the need for further research.”
Oh well, never mind then, I guess the “further research” will just have to include all the boys in Portland drinking artificially fluoridated water. If it doesn’t worry the Mercury News Team then why would it worry anyone else?
Because 50% tooth decay means those kids have one cavity or more. How old were you when you had your first cavity? I was 6 or 7, I believe, and I grew up drinking fluoridated water. All the fluoride in the world won’t make a damn bit of difference if so many kids continue to subsist on high fructose corn syrup and fast food. Duh.
This article is just, well, stupid.
It takes the arguments against fluoridation and turns them into hyperbole. The characterization of the anti-fluoride movement is far off. The science is not all on the side of fluoridation. And by science, I don’t mean institutions. Institutions (especially government ones, but also private associations) are often slow to change, by virtue of their simple existence as steady institutions. It is not enough to cite the AMA, ADA, etc etc. There are many question marks being raised by scientists about the safety of water fluoridation. It is true that there is a big difference between total fluoride exposure and the levels in tap water (the fact being that fluoride can be ingested from other sources, and its toxicity is determined by total ingested, not amount ingested per; in other words, some people drink more and have higher exposure levels than others). We always pause when we have a serious question as to whether we will be endangering ourselves. Why should we be so swift when it comes to fluoride?
It’s criminal when ‘journalists’ boil down serious issues with serious consequences and make them into some hateful satire of a competing point of view. I’m not in the position of saying that pro-fluoride activists are crazy, evil corporations trying to poison the public into submission. Most anti-fluoride people in Portland do not feel this way. We are a critical people. What we see is our well-meaning neighbors advocating for the conventional wisdom of fluoridation, a conventional wisdom that has been challenged more and more thoroughly in recent years. The vast majority of European countries have removed fluoride from the water supply (some never had it at all) and they make their fluoride available in other ways.
What the anti-fluoridation side is saying is that there needs to be a thorough examination of the safety of water fluoridation. That is not such an insane claim when looking at the significant body of conflicting scientific information. There are plenty of doctors and dentists on each side of the issue. Pro-fluoridation advocates present this issue as if it’s something like climate change, where 98% of the scientists are pro fluoridation (like 98% of climate scientists believe climate change is human caused). But it is not that way at all. There is significant dissent in the dental, medical, and scientific circles when it comes to fluoride. The conventional wisdom is being challenged.
The point is: the question should at least be examined before we put a potentially dangerous chemical that is labeled a toxic and hazardous substance willingly into our water supply. We need to worry about the total intake of fluoride and whether adding that much fluoride through tap water is too much. We need to consider and seriously do a cost benefit analysis, given the known and accepted risks associated with fluoride exposure (it wreaks havoc near fertilizer plants), and figure out if there are more effective methods we can employ to protect dental health. Already, many environmental organizations in Oregon have come out against water fluoridation as too big of a risk to the environment *and* human welfare. Where do you think the fluoride’s ending up, anyways?
Even Ralph Nader, the consumer protection hero of the working class, submitted a comment to the City of Portland, urging them to forego water fluoridation because the negative impacts of water fluoridation (like dental fluorosis, higher than acceptable fluoride exposure) disproportionately affect the poor.
Point being: I see the anti-fluoridation activists as the reasonable ones. They are the ones stepping back and asking for a stronger inquiry into whether fluoride in our tap water is the best way to improve dental care. We need time to consider the recent body scientific evidence that casts doubt on water fluoridation. Then we need to give people time to experiment with other methods of improving dental health while we assess the dangers of fluoride. We have no shortage of fluoridated toothpaste in the meantime.
Aw, man. Now my article about fluoride isn’t going to be the one with the most wackadoo comments. Thanks, actual news reporters. Thanks a lot.
“Mercury News Team” wrote this? You mean this joke of an article needed more than one idiot to write?! Beyond pathetic.
You insult the intelligence of almost everyone in Portland.
DON’T MAKE ME COME IN HERE AND RICKROLL THIS WHOLE THREAD. I WILL DO IT!!!11!1
Fluoridation: a violation of medical ethics and human rights.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1274962…
Cross DW, Carton RJ.
Int J Occup Environ Health.
2003 Jan-Mar;9(1):24-9.
Silicofluorides, widely used in water fluoridation, are unlicensed medicinal substances, administered to large populations without informed consent or supervision by a qualified medical practitioner. Fluoridation fails the test of reliability and specificity, and, lacking toxicity testing of silicofluorides, constitutes unlawful medical research. It is banned in most of Europe; European Union human rights legislation makes it illegal. Silicofluorides have never been submitted to the U.S. FDA for approval as medicines. The ethical validity of fluoridation policy does not stand up to scrutiny relative to the Nuremberg Code and other codes of medical ethics, including the Council of Europe’s Biomedical Convention of 1999. The police power of the State has been used in the United States to override health concerns, with the support of the courts, which have given deference to health authorities.
PMID 12749628 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
I will say this: The illustrations are hilarious. Thank you, Alex Despain!
Can someone get the fluoride out of my tea please. 🙁
Since we already address the issue of low income children having access to dental care with OHP’s Healthy Kids Initiative, that provides free physical, mental and dental health care to all low-income children in Oregon, why do we need to fluoridate our drinking water?
@MBr I would be more convinced if that was a full article and not just an abstract. I can copy and paste persuasive papers too!
Does CDC consider the opinion of the NRC on fluoride in drinking water in its own recommendation on community water fluoridation?
Yes, CDC considers comprehensive reviews by the NRC and other systematic scientific studies in its recommendation that community water fluoridation is a safe, effective, and inexpensive method to reduce tooth decay among populations with access to community water systems. Water fluoridation should be continued in communities currently fluoridating and extended to those without fluoridation.
@CleanWaterMan we need more comments from you because no one understands what side you’re on.
http://www.ada.org/2106.aspx
VS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
Your choice, Portland
@Katrina have you checked out eligibility for the OHP lately or
Fred I don’t understand, I can go to the ada website or Youtube? I had no idea such options existed!
Confronting the Myths of Water Fluoridation Promoters
Proponents of fluoridation possess a wide repertoire of incorrect statements about the science and unfounded generalizations about those who disagree with them. We have reproduced and refuted some of the commoner ones in this chapter:
http://archive.truthout.org/confronting-my…
Truthout sounds legit.
My fellow Americans… Wow! Okay, thats the first thing I have to say is just WOW! By now, I’m sure you’ve all heard the nefarious rumors about Barack Obama that your mom has read about in her forwarded e-mails. YES, its true that he refuses to salute the flag or sing the national anthem or recite the pledge of allegiance! YES, its true that he wouldn’t wear the pin with the American flag on it! YES, it is TRUE that his middle name is Hussein! HUSSEIN! You just don’t get any more terroristy than that, people. A liberal terrorist.. my God!! YES, its true that he hates apple pie and baseball! TRUE, ALL TRUE! But thats not even the worst of it! NO! For today I finally realized whats really going on and its much much worse.. Barack Obama is a freakin’ alien!!!!! (!!!!!!!) *screams*
http://obamaisanalien.com/
Here’s a well-written account of the great fluoridation debate of April 10th, 2013: http://www.mismanagingperception.com/fluor… This link also contains *the actual video footage* of the entire debate, courtesy of the Multnomah County Democrats (just scroll down to the bottom for that), so you can see for yourself. Enjoy!
mismanagingperception sounds legit
Answer this question if you can. Do you know anyone who actually saw Barack Obama in Hawaii? He said he was visiting his ailing grandmother. What was he really doing? Why was his plane off the radar for over an hour? Can anyone answer that question?
Two years of painstaking research have finally paid off. We know who, or should we say what, Barack Obama really is. He was not born in Kenya. He was not born in Hawaii. Now the astounding truth can be told just in time to save the United States from disaster.
Barack Obama was born on the 4th planet from Epsilon Eridani ten and a half light years — 63 trillion miles — from our Earth.
http://www.giwersworld.org/opinion/space-a…
To the anti-flouriders who claim that “Yes” advocates are all being bribed: You lost my vote.
“I had no fixed opinion on whether or not fluoride should be added to drinking water… Slowly, I came to the conclusion that there were strong experimental and clinical indications that fluorides present health hazards to people in many ways. The more I learned, the more I became convinced that the addition of fluorides to drinking water was, and is, a mistake.”
— Dr. Robert L. Isaacson, co-author
of the National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
“Fluoride in Drinking Water” report
“The NRC report is relevant to many aspects of the water fluoridation debate… [T]he report discusses the wide range of drinking water intake among members of the population, which means that groups with different fluoride concentrations in their drinking water may still have overlapping distributions of individual fluoride exposure. ln other words, the range of individual fluoride exposures at 1 mg/L will overlap the range of individual exposures at 2 mg/L or even 4 mg/L. Thus, even without consideration of differences in individual susceptibility to various effects, the margin of safety between 1 and 4 mg/L is very low.” […] “Elimination of community water fluoridation at the earliest possible date would be in the best interest of public health.”
— Dr. Kathleen Thiessen, co-author
of the National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
“Fluoride in Drinking Water” report
“In my opinion, the evidence that fluoridation is more harmful than beneficial is now overwhelming.”
— Dr. Hardy Limeback, co-author
of the National Academy of Sciences
National Research Council
“Fluoride in Drinking Water” report
A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards
Publication Year: 2006
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=1…
Well clearly Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland is giving us all…. what? Something? Someone gave me a t-shirt last night. But it was for an unrelated organization. But maybe they did it in secret.
The American Dental Association continues to endorse fluoridation of community water supplies as safe and effective for preventing tooth decay. This support has been the Association’s position since policy was first adopted in 1950. The ADA’s policies regarding community water fluoridation are based on the overwhelming weight of peer-reviewed, credible scientific evidence. The ADA, along with state and local dental societies, continues to work with federal, state and local agencies to increase the number of communities benefiting from water fluoridation.
http://www.ada.org/fluoride.aspx
Ralph Nader on water fluoridation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5HN4Rkxx78…
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=…
OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES
The committee’s conclusions regarding the potential for adverse effects from fluoride at 2 to 4 mg/L in drinking water do not address the lower exposures commonly experienced by most U.S. citizens. Fluoridation is widely practiced in the United States to protect against the development of dental caries; fluoride is added to public water supplies at 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L. The charge to the committee did not include an examination of the benefits and risks that might occur at these lower concentrations of fluoride in drinking water.
Pretty lame, antis, pretty lame.
A Republican group in Kansas wants Topeka city officials to remove fluoride from the city’s drinking water in order to preserve the intelligence of legislators in the state’s capital.
Citing concerns about the chemical’s impact on IQ, the Kansas Republican Assembly, a conservative group that has campaigned against fluoridation, is sending a letter to Topeka’s top leaders urging that the city’s fluoride pipe be shut off during the annual legislative session. A draft of the letter and the minutes of the group’s January meeting where the proposal was made surfaced on the KRA’s website in recent days.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/t…
Off topic but, does your webmaster know what a hr tag is?
The tea partyers issue dire warnings of the threat posed by government, but their movement ignores the threat from corporate America: pollution, dangerous products and banking practices that brought us the worst economic crash since the Great Depression.
Sharron Angle, the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, proposed removing government-ordered fluoride from drinking water. But is she expressing similar concern about toxic chemicals corporate polluters put in her tea?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-becker-a…
The goal is to alter behavior by chemically changing the way in which the brain functions. One of the primary methods through which this is achieved is by fluoridating water and food supplies. Blaylock explains how fluoride opportunists seized upon falls in dental cavities, which were occurring naturally as a result of increased calcium intake and better diets in the west, to claim that mass fluoridation was the answer, while burying a plethora of studies that proved adding fluoride to water did not reduce cavities at all and in fact in several instances increased dental cavities.
http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2012/11/…
Do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk and…ice cream. Ice cream, Portland Mercury readers, children’s ice cream…
You know when fluoridation first began?
Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946. How does that coincide with your post-war commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core commie works!
I first became aware of it during the physical act of love. Yes, a profound sense of fatigue… A feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I… I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
To the person concerned that flouride is going to hurt salmon… it’s actually not going to hurt salmon. The amount of fluoride added to the river is completely insignificant. Peak water demand from the Bureau of Water is less than 150 million gallons a day. That may sound a lot, but… the sewage treatment plant discharges to the Columbia River, the flow of which is 160 billion gallons a day, i.e. 1,000 times the total flow from Portland.
Additionally, per http://or.water.usgs.gov/pubs_dir/Pdf/colu…, the background flouride concentration in the Columbia river is from 0.1 to 0.2 mg/L. From the Columbia River WWTP NPDES Permit Fact Sheet, the dilution at the mixing zone boundary is 97:1. So, after dilution at the mixing zone boundary, the flouridation of Portland’s water supply would add 0.007 mg/L of fluoride to an existing 0.100 to 0.200 mg/L. Not really significant. Certainly not for salmon. This argument just doesn’t fly.
To everyone that loves pointing out that there are “economic interests” pushing this, don’t forget that environmental activists have an economic incentive to rile people up… it’s how they make money. It’s their job. They don’t all have pure motives. (Many many do, but not all of them.)
Amy Goodman & Juan González present “The Fluoride Deception” on Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/17/the_… (June 17, 2004).
Journalist Christopher Bryson claims in his new book “The Fluoride Deception” that the post-war campaign to fluoridate drinking water was less a public health innovation than a public relations ploy sponsored by industrial users of fluoride–including the government’s nuclear weapons program. [includes transcript].
Hailed as a harmless chemical that would prevent tooth decay, new evidence shows how fluoride could be linked to serious health problems. […] According to Bryson, research challenging fluoride’s safety was either suppressed or not conducted in the first place. He says fluoridation is a triumph not of medical science but of US government spin.
“Dr. Robert Kehoe, who headed up the laboratory at the University Of Cincinnati, spent his entire career telling the United States public health community that adding lead to gasoline was safe. That’s now being discredited. He was also one of two leading public health scientists saying that adding fluoride to water was safe and good for children. […] the second was a fellow scientist by the name of Dr. Harold Hodge. For most of the Cold War, Dr. Hodge was the leading scientist assuring the nation of the safety and effectiveness of adding fluoride to water supplies. Dr. Hodge had his public hat, he had his private hat. He was the senior toxicologist for the Manhattan Project to build the world’s first atomic bomb. […] Edward Bernays is a legendary figure in the 20th century. He is the father of public relations. He understood that you could harness liberal sentiment for commercial gain. He says that helping out on the fluoride campaign in New York in the early 1960’s interested him because it related to problems of engineering consent. So, he was the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.”
–Christopher Bryson, journalist and author of ‘The Fluoride Deception’, on Democracy Now!
(Excerpts from: Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/17/the_…)
“Journalists and watchdog groups regularly raise hell about just the sort of industry corruption of public health policy described in The Fluoride Deception. We don’t brand the watchdogs as conspiracy theorists; we thank them for doing their job. After reading Bryson’s account of our national infatuation with fluoride, it’s hard not to wonder how we could have ignored so serious an issue for so long.”
–Natural Resources Defense Council, “On Earth” Newsletter, Fall 2004.
“Bryson, an investigative reporter, explores various aspects of fluoride information and disinformation, from huge industrial exposures in making atom bombs to the much lower doses desired to protect teeth from decay. This is a well-researched, well-written, and well-referenced account… [A]n interesting, thought-provoking, and eye-opening work. Summing Up: Recommended. All levels.”
CHOICE Magazine (Current Reviews for Academic Libraries) March 2005
We just pulled our advertising with the mercury. If you would like to see some of the sane reasons to not take a chance with fluoride, check out: https://www.facebook.com/HealthyPortlandFo…
That’s a mature response to an opposing view point!
Chris Christie Is A Lizard Person
Hey, guess what America. The Governor of New Jersey is a lizard person! I bet you didn’t know that.
http://www.lizardpersonornot.com/
did anyone notice that at the end of #2 they admit that there is already flouride runoff in the water as it is? so say they add their 0.7 parts per million, that is in addition to what is already runoff into the water, can they control what the run off amounts are? will they adjust their add-ins based on the run off content in each area? Did you know that poisons take longer to leave your body than nutrients do? so the more tap water you drink the more the poisons build up… I live in a flouridated state and see plenty of people who drink the tap water and have horrendous teeth, it doesn’t do shit. The article said their was no definitive link between flouride and mental health issues or physical health issues, but it failed to mention there is no definitive proof that there is no link either… it works both ways…
someone said, “well you don’t have to drink tap water, you can buy bottled water or a water filter that removes flouride” you do realize that the filters that actually remove flouride are near $1000, cavity filled with state medical costs about $30, an extraction without medical can run anywhere from $30-$75… toothepaste only costs about $2 and can lasts a few months if you brush morning and night… over brushing is also bad as it strips away the enamel…
You um, do know that fluoride is a naturally occurring chemical right?
NO NEED FOR FLUORIDE IN THE WATER! KIDS GET FREE FLUORIDE IN SCHOOL!
https://web.multco.us/health/school-fluori…
Wonder how long that will last…
Research findings from The Iowa Fluoride Study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1905431…
OBJECTIVES:
The “optimal” intake of fluoride has been widely accepted for decades as between 0.05 and 0.07 mg fluoride per kilogram of body weight (mg F/kg bw) but is based on limited scientific evidence. The purpose of this paper is to present longitudinal fluoride intake data for children free of dental fluorosis in the early-erupting permanent dentition and free of dental caries in both the primary and early-erupting permanent teeth as an estimate of optimal fluoride intake.
CONCLUSIONS:
Given the overlap among caries/fluorosis groups in mean fluoride intake and extreme variability in individual fluoride intakes, firmly recommending an “optimal” fluoride intake is problematic.
steve h, according to your arguments the mixing zone at John Day Dam for the aluminum smelter plant would have also been diluted effectively. As I pointed, the mixing is not complete. Water samples taken from the plant showed mixing wasn’t complete until you got some distance downriver. With Salmon and their migration patterns, we know there was a 50% die off and the study proves the lack of forward progress with a specially set up salmon migration simulator of the mechanism of action based on concentrations actually measured in the water.
Your response doesn’t hold water.
A 2005 TIME Magazine Story
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/…
“And in Western Europe, where the drop in tooth decay in recent decades is as sharp as that in the U.S., 17 of 21 countries have either refused or discontinued fluoridation, contending that fluoride toothpastes offer adequate protection. (Only Ireland adds fluoride to most of its water systems, while Switzerland fluoridates its salt.)”
I’m voting NO and will continue to get my fluoride from toothpaste.
I just hope the bill passes so these anti-fluoride jerks move away (p.s. good luck finding a place to live that doesn’t have fluoride in their water).
This is the last time you will catch me clicking on a link from the aptly named Portland MERCURY. At least Willamette Week took a stab @ objectivity. Y’all just openly checked y’all’s JSchool credentials @ the door & stumped for HKHP. Try 2 be less transparent in the future, Kay?
Portland doesn’t get a whole lot of sun. Should we put vitamin D supplements in the water? A lot of folks in this city have seasonal depression. Should we put anti-depressants in the water? Naturally occurring fluoride is not the same as Hexafluorosilicic acid. If city council is so concerned with the dental health of low income families they could use the 5million+ dollars they are trying to spend on purchasing industrial by-products to help fund adequate dental care for those low income families. You are tools and your paper has sucked for a long time.
Fluoridation is an environmental injustice that hits poor children of color the hardest.
Protect ALL kids. Vote NO.
http://afrocentricnews.com/afro/fluoridega…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fluorida…
If Brazil – the hottest nation in the world – puts fluoride in their water, let’s just stop debating right now.
From KATU’s research, via wweek since KATU’s link isn’t working:
http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-30098-s…
Among the findings revealed through KATU’s public records requests: children in areas with fluoridated water show little difference in the number of cavities they suffer, compared to Portland. As Bailey-Shah reports:
“You’d think the kids with fluoridated water would fare better. But in the Problem Solvers’ analysis, the results were nearly the same:
53.7% of the kids in the non-fluoridated areas had one or more cavities
52.03% of kids in fluoridated areas had one or more cavities
47.81% of kids in the Portland water district (which is currently fluoride-free) had one or more cavities.”
MORE LIKE PORTLAND MERCSCARY
Everything you need to know about fluoride in 20 minutes:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GX0s-4AyWfI
I have a serious problem with the implications of this study, published in the journal NeuroToxicology, that silicofluorides (of which fluorosilic acid is one) increased lead levels in children, compared to sodium fluoride and no fluoride.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005…
I have yet to see this addressed by anyone in this debate.
Those for and against fluoridation agree that too much fluoride is a bad thing and can damage teeth and bones. The EPA says water concentrations at 4 parts per million can cause bone damaging skeletal fluorosis. Toothpaste has 1,000 ppm with a poison warning to not swallow.
So both sides of this issue should be signing the petition against pending legislation that would allow fluoride residues on foods e.g. 900 ppm fluoride on dried eggs. That’s if they want to protect Americans and not fluoride and their own political viability.
Petition is here: http://org.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2…
So I think you have to add two things to your “sane” arguments list:
1. What are we getting for 5 million dollars, if we already are doing better than areas with fluoride (and areas with fluoride aren’t doing better than those without outside of Portland). I mean, we’re not made of money.
2. Lead levels not going up in children is a good thing.
Hi, I’m the Portland Mercury and I believe everything my government tells me! They’ve never been caught lying before, I’m quite sure. Iraq was totally responsible for 9-11 …AND we would have never found those weapons of mass destruction had we not invaded! This country has never been caught experimenting on people and the government should totally medicate our water with a toxic by-product of Aluminum. It only makes sense! I mean common! Hitler put flouride in the water of the concentration camps because he damn well cared about the dental health of the Jewish people. That’s a documented fact! I know, because I’m the Portland Mercury PHD.
to seth w, I’d like to see that report on the discharge from the aluminum smelter because I doubt the discharge conditions are even close to similar. Do you have a link?
Did you look at the numbers I presented? After approximately 100:1 dilution in the mixing zone, the amount of additional flouride (0.007 mg/L) coming from the treatment plant is less than one tenth the uncertainty in the actual background concentration of fluoride in the Columbia River (0.100 to 0.200 mg/L). There is no way that adding 0.007 to a naturally varying value of 0.100 to 0.200 mg/L can possibly have an effect. If you can’t see that, then I really don’t know what else to say.
J. William Hirzy PHD was the former EPA Senior Scientist (Risk Assessment) This is the guy that would know. He said they falsified facts and documents to draw ridiculous conclusions about the safety of Flouride in drinking water. Maybe you should look at all the PHDs that are whistleblowers saying how dangerous Flouride is here:
http://www.fluoridegate.org/the-film/
“I was told of this entire scheme by a German chemist who was an official of the great IG Farben chemical industries and was also prominent in the Nazi movement at the time. I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years` research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorine–any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person mentally or physically.” CHARLES E. PERKINS, Chemist, 2 October 1954.
To Homer, check out this website: http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/nohss/ByState.asp…
From the CDC: 35% of 3rd graders in Oregon have untreated tooth decay and 27% of the Oregon population has fluoridated water. 15% of 3rd graders in Washington have untreated tooth decay and 63% of the Washington population has fluoridated water.
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%
Clean Water Portland gets a much higher percentage (11+ times) of individual
donations *from Portland* than Healthy Kids Healthy Portland.
Individual donations from Portland:
CWP: 32.1%
HKHP: 2.7%
Source:
OR Secretary of State https://secure.sos.state.or.us/orestar/got… analyzed by Seth Wooley (4/24/13).
Fluoridation would mean spending millions of dollars to add 1.1 million pounds a year of fluorosilicic acid, an unpurified byproduct of fertilizer production, to our water. Fluorosilicic acid is not the same as the pharmaceutical-grade fluoride found in toothpaste, and contains arsenic and lead.
The people who started HKHP don’t care for children teeth (I’m sure some of the volunteers they reeled in do), they care for profits. Follow the dollars, there isn’t a dental crisis in Portland.
I am voting NO.
How about we just have water in our water? Would that be OK?
If you want some toxic chemicals added, I’m sure there are plenty of Aluminum plants that would be happy to get rid of their toxic waste by giving you some to put in YOUR water.
Meanwhile, leave mine the fuck alone. Thank you.
By the way, I’m the Portland Mercury, I also play the role of every unbelieving parent in every science fiction movie ever made. I’m super likable!
To Steve H: I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. The important metric to look at is caries experience, not whether that caries experience is treated or not. Oregon is slightly higher at 66.3% vs Washington at 57.9%. Absent other data, you might suspect fluoridation has something to do with that 8.4% difference, since Washington has more than twice the amount of fluoridation. However, KATU’s research gives us direct data that allows us to compare how well fluoridation is working in this state vs non-fluoridation, which I think is vastly more informative. And the answer is, it’s not preventing caries.
As the comments
Used to be the commies. Now it’s the self proclaimed libertarian who doesn’t want the Govt
to force their medication. Appears you also don’t like vaccinations.
Nobody going to tell me what to do. What a bunch of paranoid self important asses.
To David White: How dare people think they should have a say in what goes into their bodies!
I am late to the party on this one.
So it is that the Portland Mercury finally comes out of the closet as the same brand of corporate cheerleadering, anti-science snakes that defended the junk science of the tobacco industry, the nuclear power industry, and those who were on the record that DDT was safe, and asbestos was safe, and mercury fillings were safe, and BPA was safe, and thalidomide was safe, and leaded gasoline was safe, and on, and on.
I surely hope the people of Portland are not as gullible, lazy, and ethically bankrupt as the staff of this opinioneering, pathetic excuse for a ‘news’ vehicle. I’ll leave you with some quotes from other ‘crazy’ conspiracy theorists:
“The American Medical Association is NOT prepared to state that no harm will be done to any person by water fluoridation. The AMA has not carried out any research work, either long-term or short-term, regarding the possibility of any side effects.” – Dr. Flanagan, Assistant Director of Environmental Health, American Medical Association.
“Based on data from the National Academy of Sciences, current levels of fluoride exposure in drinking water may cause arthritis in a substantial portion of the population long before they reach old age” -Dr. Robert Carton, former EPA Scientist.
“fluoride exposure, at levels that are experienced by a significant proportion of the population whose drinking water is fluoridated, may have adverse impacts on the developing brain.” Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility, May 2000
“The plain fact that fluorine is an insidious poison harmful, toxic and cumulative in its effects, even when ingested in minimal amounts, will remain unchanged no matter how many times it will be repeated in print that fluoridation of the water supply is ‘safe.'” Dr. Ludgwig Grosse, Chief of Cancer Research, U.S. Veterans Administration.
In Harlem, NY, which has been fluoridated for 32 years, “There’s more dental decay among these kids; we see the beginning of inflamed gingivitis in their mouths.” American Dental Association, May 2000
“All of the organizations promoting water fluoridation agree that dental fluorosis, which is the first visible sign of systemic poisoning, increases with water fluoride levels.” Dr. Kennedy, Past President of International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology and a practicing Dentist for 20 years.
The Washington Bureau editor of AD Impact, the monthly publication of the Academy of General Dentistry, wrote last year that supporters of fluoridation have had an “unwillingness to release any information that would cast fluorides in a negative light,” and that organized dentistry has lost “its objectivity – the ability to consider varying viewpoints together with scientific data to reach a sensible conclusion.”
“That the artificial fluoridation of public water supplies, such as is contemplated by [Houston] City Ordinance No. 80-2530, may cause or may contribute to the cause of cancer, genetic damage, intolerant reactions, and chronic toxicity, including dental mottling, in man; that the said artificial fluoridation may aggravate malnutrition and existing illnesses in man; and that the value of said artificial fluoridation is in doubt as to the reduction of tooth decay in man.” – Judge Farris, presiding judge in a case involving the fluoridation of Houston’s water.
The former editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association said he often received telephone calls from irate AMA members and letters from state medical societies and AMA officers “threatening political action against the editor and the Journal for publishing what offended them ideologically, or more likely imposed on (physicians’) ability to earn money.” (article) – Mr. Lundberg, editor of JAMA for 17 years
“Fluoride has been shown to adversely effect the central nervous system, causing behavioral changes, increased hip fractures and reproduction problems.” Natick Report Research Team
[Research Microbiologist, U.S. Army, Dr. B. J. Gallo, Environmental Chemist, J. Kupperschmidt Apollo Program Project Scientist, Dr. N.R. Mancuso, U.S. Army Natick Research Labs, A. Murray, Molecular Biologist, Dr. Strauss]
Milk is good for teeth.
How about filling up the reservoirs with Milk?
Maybe we all just need to calm the fuck down.
How about just filling up the reservoirs with Prozac?
The amazing and scary thing to me is how easily some people can be made to believe the conspiracy theory that all those against fluoride are conspiracy theorists or otherwise anti-science and uninformed/misinformed. Do your own research people – anything else is just lazy and irresponsible. Read all sides, google, think, don’t accept statements without understanding them and looking at data.
Yes, by all means don’t trust actual scientific research promoted by “dentists” who secretly want you to develop flurosis! Do your own research! YouTube is full of good information on both sides!
Fluoridation Chemical Accidents: http://www.actionpa.org/fluoride/chemicals… Unless otherwise noted, the chemical involved is Hydrofluosilicic Acid or a similar fluoridation chemical. When not fully investigated by the National Response Center, it can simply be called “hazardous waste” and would not show up here due to inadequate accident reporting. Accidents where the medium is listed as “drinking water” are those where the spill or accident resulted in an overdose of fluoride in the drinking water system itself.
Acute Poisoning from Water Fluoridation: http://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/fluo…
“Inspection of public water systems and monitoring of fluoride concentrations are needed to prevent outbreaks of fluoride poisoning.”
–Division of Field Epidemiology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.
Acute fluoride poisoning from a public water system.
N Engl J Med. 1994 Jan 13;330(2):95-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8259189
“Thousands of households had to wait almost a fortnight to be told they had drunk water containing 20 times the allowable limit of fluoride. […] The investigation will also focus on why at least three safety devices failed at the plant, supplying homes in Brendale and Warner with 30mg/L of fluoride, when the limit is 1.5mg/L.”
Damage control after fluoride blunder hits homes | The Courier-Mail | May 15, 2009
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/flourid…
But what will be the effect of fluoridated water on the erection I have from reading this thread full of hot, sputtery nonsense?
Steve R: Yes, it is indeed a battle of dentists vs. youtube videos. So glad you distilled it into its appropriate black and white components. Otherwise one might have to not take anyone’s word for it and actually look at studies – studies that show effectiveness of fluoride, studies that show potential dangers of fluoride. Trust your dentists! Or be daring and trust youtube videos! Either way, trust someone’s opinion instead of doing your own research. Oh wait, that’s the exact opposite of what I said. I recommend the book “Trust Us, We’re Experts.”
“Clean Water Portland makes a show on its website of having the support of “over 60 Portland doctors,” but the majority of those named are naturopaths, acupuncturists, and chiropractors—fields which help a great deal of people, but frequently come under fire from traditional medicine for lacking in scientific evidence.”
This ridiculous sentence severely weakened your argument, and this whole article reads like a sleazy press release. Disappointing.
Homer, you make the TV character you’re based off of look like a genius. I have some recommended reading for you as well:
Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standard (2006)
Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2012)
Evidence for Fluoride Effects on Salmon Passage at John Day Dam, Columbia River, (1982—1986)
The Impact of Artificial Fluoridation on Salmon Species in the Northwest USA and British Columbia, Canada (1994)
Water Fluoridation and the Environment: Current Perspective in the United States (2004)
Chronic fluoride exposure has a role in etiology of coronary artery ectasia: sialic acid/glycosaminoglycan ratio. (2011)
The Effects Of Fluoride On The Developing Human Brain. (1992)
The York Review – A systematic review of public water fluoridation. (2002)
The Iowa Fluoride Study (2009)
Science and Environmental Health Network. The Precautionary Principle: A Common Sense Way to Protect Public Health and the Environment. (2000)
Why did I read the comments? WHY WHY WHY
I think the move would have been to write the article as, “Fluoride is great because… YOUR MAMA!” It would have been a much more logical argument than the one posited above.
This film is full of whistleblowers who are doctors and scientists at the highest levels of the EPA and other relevant government agencies that talk about documents being shredded, top scientists who were fired for refusing to go along with the status quo. This stuff is toxic, period. Why do they care so much about dental health? Common, isn’t that just a little crazy? People laugh at conspiracy theorists…I consider myself a liberal; a musician into peace and love. I believe all people are equal no matter what color they are, no matter how much money they make, no matter what they believe.
But honestly, over the last few years I have watched Obama go along with the status quo and beyond. See drones, Patriot Act, NDAA, these are very troubling. Our government simply does not love us. Period. It really doesn’t take a Doctorate in history or bio-chemistry to see what is going on. I think right wingers are not empathetic enough, but liberals like me have been FAR too passive about understanding the dark side of our own government and how they are essentially purposefully trying to cull the population. It’s the dark side of Human Geography and you can ignore if you wish. But the right and left have to come together in our humanity. Compared with all the Electro Magnetic Toxic Pollution, Chem Trails (which government officials admit exist now) and look into Aspertame and see if you want that in your chewing gum. Common, we the people are on the same side. There is a dark side of the force that loves it when we hate each other and disagree. Can we just agree on one thing that should be totally obvious like keeping our drinking water clean? Just this ONE thing, can we come together to protect each other and our children? Jesus. Please watch this movie. It say it all better than I can:
http://www.fluoridegate.org/the-film/
Thank you this is just the article we need! It will be such a shame if we vote this down. If it fails, I will be so ashamed of us as a city. I never imagined thinking that living in a vibrant, creative, liberal paradise could have a downside.
The Multnomah County Democratic Party hosted a Debate on the Fluoridation of Portland’s Drinking Water Supply (Measure 26-151, that will appear on the May ballot) on Wednesday, April 10 at the Matt Dishman Community Center. Here’s the video: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxGiG8zHB…
What a great place for conspiracy collecting! Payoffs to the Mercury, of all papers — industrial giants who want to sneak poison in your water cause … just evil I guess, even Nazis themselves (in a classic 1950s bit from the John Birch society).
Before you watch all these YouTube clips against flourides, ask yourself a simple question — if flouride was so dangerous, why would dentists and city officials want to put in THEIR OWN water, that they drink? If it’s so dangerous, how come it’s been used in every other major city in America for DECADES, but the antis can’t show a single person harmed by it? I mean, that’s hundreds of millions of people over decades….
One more thing — for people who bring up Europe not flouridating water as much any more. That’s because most European companies now flouridate their salt, or their milk. You could look it up you know.
Oooo, payoffs. What a conspiracy theory. Except for that tiny detail that DOPAC, the lobbying arm of the ADA, gave Upstream Public Health the initial $50,000 so they could quietly lobby the City Council in secret and off their public calendars, violating the city’s lobbying and reporting requirements.
It was DOPAC that was ‘passing though’ funds to state legislator campaign PACs who could then transfer a contribution in the identical amount to HKHP’s campaign and make it appear as though they were garnering legitimate favor from said legislator. Every one of HKHP’s transactions filed through Orestar was auto-filed at literally the last minute … except the politician campaign PACs that donated. This establishes that they’re knowingly hiding what they want for as long as possible.
The ADA has also been lobbying against Medicare since 1965 and lately they’ve been heavily lobbying for a repeal of parts of the new health care law that would permit independent dental health-care practitioners from operating outside the ADA’s monopoly privilege, offering basic dental treatment at reduced costs.
The Dentists of Oregon PAC is a lobbying arm of the ADA and has been one of the largest funders of Healthy Kid’s, Healthy Portland from the get-go.
And what was that about Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland bribing minority groups for support?
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-2056…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfbrLGwwZOM…
@Secretspy, you know what else you could look up? Only five nations in western Europe have any fluoridated salt, and they don’t force an entire population to ingest it. Stores offer the option to purchase non-fluoridated salt, kinda like how it’s optional to buy non-fluoridated toothpaste.
At secret spy: the only conspiracy left is the conditioning by the pro side to get you to reflexively think those against fluoride in the water are conspiracy theorists. As far “but the antis can’t show a single person harmed by it” I hope you’re not serious. Even the pro side will admit it causes fluorosis. There’s significant evidence that those with any kind of kidney impairment should avoid fluoride. Did you even bother to look after “the experts” tod you what to believe?
You forgot the most important argument: maybe there are chemicals in our water already, but they are there to make our water potable. Fluoride has nothing to do with making water safe to drink. At best fluoride is a preventative medication and only a petty, arrogant tyrant would feel they have the right to forcibly medicate the public water supply of an entire city against so much opposition. Welcome to the nanny state.
HERE’S AN ARGUMENT YOU FORGOT:
FUCK YOU, PORTLAND JERKURY!!!
Ever wonder why Portland has such a long history of opposition to fluoridation? It might have something to do with this (excerpt from “The Fluoride Deception” by Christopher Bryson):
Sold to New Yorkers as a public-health initiative, the Committee to Protect Our Children’s Teeth had powerful links to the U.S. military-industrial complex, and to the efforts of big industrial corporations to escape liability for fluoride pollution. In 1956, for example, the Committees booklet Our Children’s Teeth was hot off the press. Before most New York parents had an opportunity to read about fluorides wonders, lawyers for the Reynolds aluminum company submitted the booklet to a federal appeals court in Portland, Oregon, where the company had been found guilty of injuring the health of a local farming family through fluoride pollution (see chapter 13). Inside the booklet, the judges were told, “are to be found the statements of one medical and scientific expert after another, all to the effect that fluorides in low concentrations (such as are present around aluminum and other industrial plants) present no hazard to man.” (Today such a pseudo grass-roots effort would be known as an “astroturf” organization because of its fake popular character and essentially corporate roots.) The committee was funded by the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, and its goals were to break the political logjam in New York and to help topple dominoes across the country, according to the committee’s program director, Henry Urrows. “That was the working assumption-our justification as far as the Kellogg people were concerned-and it turned out that was quite correct because we broke the back of the anti-fluoridation movement by winning in New York and Chicago,” Urrows told me.
Well they didn’t break Portland!
Read Chapter 13 here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/121795065/Christ…
Fluoridation litigation, then and now
Oregon State Bar Bulletin — Aug./Sept. 2005
http://www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin…
It’s sad to see The Merc’s “news team” put one-sided crap like this out there under the guise of a news article. God forbid you would have used some of that editorial might to actually look into who’s really behind the big push for fluoridation in our city, because I’ll bet you WW’s Pulitzer it’s a group/company that has nothing to do with public health.
WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL OF THE CHEMICALS IN OUR WATER WORKS
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1206134714…
This article stinks of corruption or lack of research. Portland Mercury you should be ashamed of yourself for taking sides and for not doing your homework. I for one am going to stop reading your paper. I am a once long time reader, who after reading this does not trust your paper and will no longer read!
If the PM had done basic research they might have discovered that a Multnomah County program already exists to provide area children with FREE daily fluoride treatments.
MC Health Dept fluoride program details:
https://web.multco.us/health/school-fluori…
Portland Public Schools fluoride distribution info:
http://www.pps.k12.or.us/vida/5601.htm
So-the question is…who stands to gain financially from building a $5 million treatment facility which will cost $500K per year to maintain-that will be paid for increases to our water bills??
http://www.portlandoregon.gov/water/articl…
At a time when we’re cutting city budgets, why add a costly program which essentially duplicates a child targeted fluoride distribution program in place now?
It makes no sense to medicate the entire population if it’s “the kids” teeth HKHP is supposedly so worried about.
Wow, you literally spent MINUTES listening to Dr. Jay Harris Levy “speak eloquently..on a slew of [human fluoride exposure] studies”? Good job, Mercury!
…Actually, not good job. Not. at. all.
Because you didn’t really take it in, did you? You mustered – by my generous calculation – maybe A MINUTE of your precious research time focussing enough to retain what Dr. Levy said.
The rest of those 11+ eloquent minutes you spent half-dozing through a haze of caffeine and nicotine withdrawal summarily refute each of the major talking points espoused by the pro-forced fluoridation lobby.
Fail. Go smoke another coffin nail. But try doing it first this time. Eat a granola bar, jog in place – something, anything to wake your tired ass up. Now go hit that replay button:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30umO7s4Zj0
No worries, though. You belong to a thick and well-funded crew of equally tongue-tied and listless advocates in the pro-involuntary medication camp with whom to gather together and pat each other on the back in congratulations for your noteworthy and entirely mutual mediocrity.
You can shake hands, browse the party favors, snarf down some chex mix – you know, recheck your blood sugar levels – and read this:
http://www.mismanagingperception.com/fluoride-lobby-fumbles/
Oh. I guess that did work, either. Hmm, if all else fails perhaps you can lobby for adding fluoride to chem trails. You know, one bird two stones. I mean, we have to find something to do with all this INDUSTRIAL WASTE FROM THE PHOSPHATE FERTILIZER AND ALUMINUM SMELTING FACTORIES. Why not make a buck and kill some ducks? Right? Right guys? Guys?
@ckd- agreed. This city cannot afford this. I wish more people understood that.
At Press5ForPigLatin: “because I’ll bet you WW’s Pulitzer it’s a group/company that has nothing to do with public health.” Zing! LOL
A new addition to the discussion of the meta analysis written by Harvard Adjunct Professor (not very high up the tenure scheme) is a letter signed jointly by the Deans of the Harvard, Dental and Public Health schools.
They state:
“As Deans of Harvard Medical School, Harvard School of Dental Medicine and the Harvard School of Public Health, we continue to support community water fluoridation as an effective and safe public health measure for people of all ages.
Numerous reputable studies over the years have consistently demonstrated that community water fluoridation is safe, effective, and practical. Fluoridation has made an enormous impact on improving the oral health of the American people.
Our country is fortunate to have over 204 million Americans living in fluoridated communities and having access to the health and economic benefits of this vital public health measure.”
One’s attention is drawn to the letterhead and Harvard’s Latin motto: Veritas – Truth
This surely underscores the correctness of the Mercury’s view of the IQ matter.
I’m having deja vu, is it because this reminds me when the Mercury published that article in support of Charlie Hales? I can’t remember, maybe it’s the fluoride.
You almost had me ckd because money. But then the last sentence… welp.
I GUESS IT JUST DOESN’T HOLD WATER AMIRITE
Whatev Billy. Harvard is just a tool of the lizard people trying to control our minds through fluoride.
You really opened my eyes, Mercury. I’ll never trust your voters cheat sheets again.
lol what you take that shit seriously?
Ha, I think we all know the Portland MERCURY is just laying the groundwork for introducing Polonium into the drinking water.
It is absolutely crazy to think that portland’s water isn’t fluoridated. for such a forward leaning city, that is pretty ass backward, to use a technical term. i grew up in colorado, and i give alot of credit for my dental health to the fact that my water was fluoridated when i was growing up; i had fewer cavities growing up than my sisters who grew up in portland. i have never met anyone who suffered from discolored teeth from fluoride nor anyone adversely affected by fluoride. and having the sierra club and others argue on the point that adding .7ppm of fluoride is going to pollute the river is bunk. it isn’t going to have any detrimental impact, where as all that shit, piss, cleaning chemicals, fertilizers, pesticides, oil, gasoline, diesel, plastic bags, and so on that are already accumulate in the river are where efforts should be placed to reduce pollution. the fact that the portland water bureau or whoever gives warning on not going into the river after it rains heavily because of the overflow is what they should be more concerned with, don’t give me this bs that fluoride is going to to pollute the rivers. and if you swallow toothpaste when you’re brushing your teeth the worst thing that will happen is that your stomach will be upset, you’d have to eat the whole tube to have to go to the hospital and even then you’re not going to die. for f’s sake, it’s like you’re all listening to jenny mccarthy for medical advice. it has been proven that fluoride is safe and extremely beneficial for your health.
HEY I know! how about adding vitamin C into our water. That’s good right? Maybe some Vitamin D – makes sense with all the rain and clouds right? Why stop there? The point is that I don’t want freakin fluoride. So why should I have to suck it down? It’s medicating the water. Medicating the water makes no scientific sense. This is not an accurate way to treat a health concern… FULL STOP.
Oops, sorry Homer I think I misread your comment earlier. Holy Fuck, too many comments!
How exactly is a democracy fair? No matter what a little under 50% walk away unhappy. Mob Rule does not determine equality, it undermines it. If we withheld freedom to any sort of value we would not be voting on these issues to begin with. These types of mandates violate individual rights and property rights plain and simple. The government roll should be to uphold contracts not create them.
At Spindles: No worries! Appreciate your posts.
So does the other side still get to call it “mob rule” if your side wins the public vote?
Billy Budd is here, taking a break from performing as multiple handles on the Oregonian. Welcome, Billy Budd/MotherVoltaire/ToothTruth/Git-er-done. Still curious what lobbyist firm pays for your time.
@ Vera…You apparently don’t understand the content of my post but to answer your question, yes, mob rule would apply in either outcome.
I know fluoride works to keep teeth healthy when it’s there in just the right amounts. What else it may or may not do to us I can only shrug at.
I have to say, I have tried to weigh both sides of this case, but all I hear from the pro side is that it will help, and that fluoride is proven safe.
Aspirin is also proven safe, and the dosage is marked right on the bottle so we know how much to give a baby, a child, or an adult. Some scientists somewhere will decide on the dose for everyone in Portland, regardless of whether they are children whose parents are already brushing their teeth well or not.
I don’t believe fluoride should be avoided, I just believe that the millions of dollars we’re bound to spend setting up and maintaining this program could be spent differently to benefit children. The kids this will impact the most are poor kids. Even if we do implement it, those kids are still stuck eating the cheapest food in the store, which we all know is loaded with corn syrup. If we want to fix their teeth, we ought to figure out how to stop poor kids from eating poorly.
Seriously flawed article here, MERCURY- I didn’t see any mention of dental fluorosis (which can harm if not ruin your teeth), and the fact that children are at highest risk of it, and that it is typically associated with cities implementing these programs- and also it is the major reason Fairbanks Alaska dumped their fluoride program last year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_fluoro… http://www.fairbanksalaska.us/wp-content/u…
I also saw a very clever brush-over of the source of fluorosilicic acid- by calling it an “industrial chemical”, and not an “industrial chemical waste”, you hide the fact that we don’t manufacture this stuff to put into the water like we would the sodium fluoride we put into toothpaste. It is a byproduct of industrial processes, and it’s only a by’product’ if you can sell it to somebody, if you can’t, then you have to figure out how to get rid of it, like any other industrial waste. You also mention that our water is tempered with chemicals we are unaware of anyway, so it’s not pure bull run water… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorosilicic…
As for that pure water, here’s last year’s Safe Drinking Water Act report for Portland, which shows a range of .025 to .16 ppm naturally occurring in our water- http://www.portlandoregon.gov/water/articl…
Fairbanks’ program took their water to .7 ppm, so it’s probable that’s about where ours will be. And basically, we’ll be medicating every water drinker in order to ensure that some of our children who don’t get enough fluoride can have better teeth.
Tap water must meet requirements bottled water is free to ignore, so even though our water is ‘tempered’, it’s still pretty sparkly clean- http://news.consumerreports.org/safety/200…
If I may re-state that previous paragraph about chemical waste, there are companies which need to get rid of the waste created in the process of making money, and if they can generate a program where they can sell it to the government (to be disposed of in our drinking water) rather than pay to dispose of it…
When politicians whole-heartedly bother to back something, and there are also advertisements all over town which completely fail to mention that they are promoting water fluoridation… it would be bad enough if they were to gloss over topics like the above without actually informing people of the real science involved- no, they just don’t tell you what you are voting for at all. That ticks me off and makes me suspicious and doubtful.
From the article: “It comes down to being thoughtful about how much fluoride your young child ingests.” So parents who are not “thoughtful” enough to care for their child’s dental health need to be sufficiently “thoughtful” to make sure they don’t ingest too much fluoride, even though many will probably not even realise either that fluoride is added to the water or that it is a cumulative toxin, and even though there is no viable alternative to tap water for disadvantaged people. Give me a break.
In case anyone hasn’t worked it out yet, the quote above posted by Billy Budd is a fabrication. It’s in the same vein as what a couple of Kansas newspapers wrote in the lead up to the fluoridation vote in Wichita last year.
http://braindrain.dk/2013/02/fluoridated-w…
Here’s what Philippe Grandjean, Adjunct Professor of Environmental Health at the Harvard School of Public Health, wrote recently about the misrepresentation of research he co-authored on the link between fluoride and lowered IQ in children.
“neither [Kansas] newspaper checked their information with the authors, even though statements were attributed to them”
“On average, the children with higher fluoride exposure showed poorer intelligence test performance. The high exposures generally exceeded the concentrations normally occurring in fluoridated drinking water, but only 4 of 27 studies reached an excess of 10-fold, and clear differences were found also at much lower exposures.
Addition of fluoride to drinking water has been controversial since the very beginning in the 1940s. As noted in a National Research Council report, neither benefits nor risks have been thoroughly documented.”
“Chemical brain drain should not be disregarded. The average IQ deficit in children exposed to increased levels of fluoride in drinking water was found to correspond to about 7 points – a sizable difference. To which extent this risk applies to fluoridation in Wichita or Portland or elsewhere is uncertain, but definitely deserves concern.”
Why is the fact that Portland schools offer fluoride tablets NEVER mentioned in these discussions? The issue isn’t fluoride or no fluoride – it is fluoride IN THE WATER or no fluoride IN THE WATER. Children throughout the region who reside where the water is not fluoridated have access to a FREE and voluntary program through the school to access fluoride tablets. https://web.multco.us/health/school-fluori…
Further, children can get fluoride by prescription from a doctor as well.
And of course, dental care is FAR MORE IMPORTANT, as IS noted in the above article.
But quit making it sound like these kids have no access to fluoride if we don’t put it in the water. The program to ensure they DO have access has been in place for quite some time, and allows individuals to make the decision for themselves, instead of it being forced on those who do not want it by putting it into ALL the water.
For those of you Portland journalists and legislators who opt out of researching and hide behind the CDC’s famous quote, you should know the CDC is covering themselves legally by revealing that it really doesn’t know if fluoridation is safe because they point you to and want you to read the following “safety” Reviews
Below each is a short explanation of dire warnkings
1) United States Public Health Service Review of Fluoride: Benefits and
Risks, 1991
They report the following research still needs to be done
Conduct analytical epidemiological studies of osteosarcoma to determine the
risk factors associated with its development. Fluoride exposure and bone levels
of fluoride should be included in the study design.
Evaluate the scientific merit of conducting further animal carcinogenicity
studies which use a wide range of chronic fluoride doses. Industries sponsoring
studies of fluoride should be encouraged to make their data publicly available
to aid in this evaluation.
Conduct analytical epidemiological studies to determine the relationship, if
any, among fluoride intake, fluoride bone levels, diet, body levels of nutrients
such as calcium, and bone fractures.
Conduct studies on the reproductive toxicity of fluoride using various dose
levels including the minimally toxic maternal dose.
Conduct further studies to investigate whether or not fluoride is
genotoxic.
http://www.health.gov/environment/Reviewof…
2) Institute of Medicine Dietary Reference Guidelines, 1997
Since fluoride is not a nutrient, this report set the adequate intake from all sources
to avoid children’s moderate dental fluorosis (yellow teeth) and, also, the
upper limit to avoid crippling bone damage — which the IOM admits “is too high
for persons with certain illnesses…” They determined that babies up to 6 months
should never be fed more than 0.01 mg/L fluoride.
3) National Academy of Sciences This isn’t a fluoridation risk/benefit analysis. It found EPA’s current fluoride maximum-contaminant-level-goal (MCLG) for drinking water is not protective of health and must be lowered. EPA has yet to act upon this
recommendation probably because, if they were truthful, it would kill the US’s
fluoridation program. Several members of the NRC panel believe fluoride’s MCLG
should be as close to zero as possible.(2006) This fluoride panel revealed science which shows fluoride, even at low doses, is harmful to the thyroid, kidney patients, bones, babies and people who drink lots of water.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=1…
4) Australian Government
Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) conducted a systematic review published in 2007, http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publica…
Results: “214 studies were
included. The quality of studies was low to moderate…At a fluoride level of 1
ppm an estimated 12.5% (95% confidence interval 7.0% to 21.5%) of exposed people
would have fluorosis that they would find aesthetically concerning.”
5) University of York
What the ‘York Review’ on the fluoridation of drinking water really found
“We are concerned about the continuing misinterpretations of the evidence and think it is important that decision makers are aware of what the review really found. As such, we urge interested parties to read the review conclusions in full.
We were unable to discover any reliable good-quality evidence in the fluoridation literature world-wide.
What evidence we found suggested that water fluoridation was likely to have a beneficial effect, but that the range could be anywhere from a substantial benefit to a slight disbenefit to children’s teeth.
This beneficial effect comes at the expense of an increase in the prevalence of fluorosis (mottled teeth). The quality of this evidence was poor.
An association with water fluoride and other adverse effects such as cancer, bone fracture and Down’s syndrome was not found. However, we felt that not enough was known because the quality of the evidence was poor.
The evidence about reducing inequalities in dental health was of poor quality, contradictory and unreliable.”
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/fluoridnew.…
CWP if the measure passes it will be time to play your trump card. Make sure the suppliers are in compliance with NSF Std 60 and all the toxicological studies that are required.
A.4 Data requirements for new or updated risk assessments
A.4.1 General requirements
For each substance requiring a new or updated risk assessment, toxicity data to be considered shall
Include, but not limited to, assays of genetic toxicity, acute toxicity (1 to 14 d exposure), short-term
toxicity (14 to 28 d exposure), subchronic toxicity (90 d exposure), reproductive toxicity, developmental
toxicity, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, chronic toxicity (including carcinogenicity), and human data
(clinical, epidemiological, or occupational) when available. To more fully understand the toxic potential of
the substance, supplemental studies shallbe reviewed, including, but not limited to, mode or mechanism
of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, sensitization, endrocrine disruption, and other endpoints,
as well as studies using routes of exposure other than ingestion. Structure activity relationships, physical
and chemical properties, and any other chemical specific information relevant to the risk assessment shall
also be reviewed.
How is this still going on? I’d be more likely to vote against fluoride if its opponents weren’t such sanctimonious douchebags clinging to ridiculously biased documentaries. Because um, that makes me doubt the credibility of their evidence even more.
It’s smelling like a Tea Party up in here.
What are the plans of the anti-fluoridians if the vote passes?
Hey myscof. There’s no evidence you kill babies but I’m not ruling it out.
@Aestro Just drop it I guess. But these damned loons are probably going to win and then will move on to banning the MMR vaccine.
Your number 1 reason– that water fluoridation prevents cavities– smells like bullshit to me. You state that Portland’s kids have a “problem” with cavities but don’t go on to add any data comparing our kids’ dental health with that of kids who live in areas where they do add fluoride. That data could have an impact on folks’ decision, and its absence seems telling.
It’s a weekly newspaper that makes its money off advertising. It doesn’t exactly have room for full academic studies. Take some initiative and look it up yourself if you doubt it so much.
I don’t care what “the science” says. I simply believe the government should not be in the business of mandatory medication in the water supply. Not on my dime, thanks. Chems to make water SAFE for consumption? Ok. Medication? Nope, not into it. Why do so many pro-fluoridation folks hate freedom? 😉
Portland Public Schools has a Flouride program in place. Do the low income children go to school? Please see the link: http://www.pps.k12.or.us/vida/5601.htm.
This is a quote from their web page: A daily fluoride tablet program is offered upon request at no cost to schools or families.
The European argument against fluoridation seems good but I would argue that the European NATIONAL health care initiatives such as fluoride supplements in schools, toothpaste, etc. makes the need for fluoridated water irrelevant. The general populous is getting the necessary dosage. Because the US health care system is broken the most vulnerable segments of the population are missing the boat on adequate dental care. Irrational social paranoia left over from the 50’s and 60’s is driving the anti-fluoride debate. The overwhelming scientific consensus shows no risk, significant upside and minimal cost. Where do you stand on the climate science? Show some consistency folks….
Thanks for the article, PDXM. I got this comment on my FB after posting it: “We’ve been goose-stepped into purchasing this program at a lofty sum, so who exactly is proposing to SELL it to us? The answer, which this ever-so-cynical rag does not dare mention is that the entire premise of the mass fluoridation of our water is a toxic waste disposal scam.
Just follow the money.” Do you know where PDX is buying the fluoride and how the lobby works? I’m pro-fluoride, but it’s a good question.
Wait a goddamned minute ms. Are you suggesting that an entirely different model of healthcare/dentistry and infrastructure might lead to different solutions to the same problem?
Watch it, they’ll down vote you with great vigor.
@Anti So I don’t know. Do you just read and watch anti-fluoridation stuff because school programs are being chopped left and right. (Also yes attendance and graduation rates are down for children below the poverty line. So.)
To tcraighenry: I recommend voting based on what you believe is the right vote based on the science, and whether you feel medication belongs in the public water supply. I consider City Hall meeting with lobbyists illegally off the record, then trying to force this on a populace that has twice rejected it, to be pretty d-baggy, but it’s irrelevant to whether fluoride belongs in the water (though I suppose you could argue it might be relevant as to whether you support this particular measure, given its history).
First thing beyond the whole it is illegal for the Government to mass medicate us, Fluoride is a poison. Check your toothpaste the next time you brush. There is a very clear warning about not swallowing it and calling poison control if you do. Fluoride, if you ask every dentist in the country they will tell you that any child under the age of 2 should NOT ingest fluoride. So now in the guise of protecting our kids we are poisoning them at an even younger age. There 2 very (actual) sane arguments against Fluoride. Also if you are drinking a lot of water don’t you now have to start measuring how much fluoride intake you are getting?
@Jim Blakley: Clearly you don’t realize that fluoride is a magical substance – it’s 100% safe in the water, but dangerous when put in toothpaste! The fluoride can sense the context.
At ms: “The overwhelming scientific consensus shows no risk” that’s simply not true. I’ve already posted a link to a study in the journal NeuroToxicology (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005…), and there are others, that show increased lead levels in children consuming silicofluorides versus sodium fluoride or no fluoride. And there is significant data showing dangers for anyone with kidney impairment.
I have a very personal story about how fluoride exposure affected my life, was very strongly linked to my Thyroid Cancer, and that I had to deal with all of that RIGHT AFTER I HAD A BABY!!!!!! (See below)
Did you do any actual new research or did you just recycle and perpetuate everyone else’s? No harmful chemicals???? Check out this recent development in Utah, where they actually tested the contents of the “fluoridation chemicals” and found them to have extremely high levels of arsenic, lead, aluminum, and mercury:
http://www.dmlawfirm.com/utah-halts-fluori…
And no credible studies linking fluoride with adverse health effects? Check out this
recent report prepared for the Government of Ireland, The World Health
Organization, and the European Commission comparing the disease and mortality
of the fluoridated part of Ireland versus the unfluoridated population.
Osteosarcoma, Alzheimers, Arthritis, SIDS, Down’s Syndrome…
http://www.enviro.ie/Feb2013.pdf
97% of the world doesn’t fluoridate. And there have been many studies done
internationally. One must question why the truth has been supressed here. I am
so thankful the truth is being reported elsewhere in the world.
This issue touches me very personally. Here’s my story:
In August of 2012, during my 6-week post-partum check-up, my midwife was feeling the front of my neck and she stated, “Wow, your thyroid is really swollen”. I asked, “Uh, where’s my thyroid?” She put my fingers on the front of my neck and had me feel where there was indeed, a large lump on the right side of my neck. She ordered a blood test to assess my thyroid levels, thinking that my thyroid was just swollen due to working overtime to make thyroid hormone, perhaps due to a previously undetected hypothyroidism. The blood test came back with reasonably healthy thyroid hormone levels, so hypothyroidism was ruled out as a cause for the lump. My primary care doctor ordered an ultrasound to take a closer look. Based on what they found during the ultrasound, a biopsy was then ordered. The biopsy revealed that the lump (now we knew it to be a tumor) was cancerous. I remember going into shock. I had just turned 35 a few days earlier. I had given birth in mid-July to my
long-awaited first child, William, and now I had Thyroid Cancer.
When William was 10 weeks old, on September 27, 2012, I had my entire thyroid removed. The cancer had spread beyond the thyroid sac onto the surrounding tissue, most concernedly the lymph nodes and a neighboring nerve that was adjacent to my right vocal cord. I couldn’t sing to my baby for about 6 weeks after that, because of damage that occurred during the surgery. This was really sad, as I was accustomed to singing to him constantly, and we didn’t know at that time that my voice would eventually come back. For all we knew, the voice loss would be
permanent. Post-surgery it was decided by my surgeon that it was extremely advisable that I also undergo a radioactive iodine treatment to kill all the remaining cancer cells that were still around the area of my thyroid. This would mean
that I would have to stop breastfeeding, because it would take 3 months for the
radiation to work its way completely out of my breast milk. I was a passionate
advocate of breastfeeding, and very proud of William and my success in that area. I made enormous quantities of milk, and he in turn ate with gusto and grew fat and healthy, in the 95th percentile for height and weight. Weaning William broke my heart. But the doctors said that it was more important that I do the radiation as soon as possible so that William would have his mommy around to see him grow up.
On January 9, 2013, I had my radioactive iodine treatment and then went home to live in my basement for 2 weeks. William had to go to my parent’s house for 2 weeks for his own safety, since I was extremely radioactive. My husband had to stay upstairs too. After the first week, we took walks with my parents, but I had to stay across the street from the rest of them so I wouldn’t radiate them. I would cry on
these walks because it was torture to see William but not be able to hold him
and comfort him. He looked very confused and upset and wouldn’t smile at me at all.
I felt he looked at me accusingly, like “Why are you doing this Mommy?”
Over the course of this experience I have been researching possible causes for my cancer, as it is so strange to get cancer at such a young age, and I admit it, I was extremely angry about the whole thing. I knew I was supposed to be thankful to be alive, and I was, but I still felt so much grief about what the cancer had cost me. My naturopathic doctor mentioned in passing that the thyroid cancer rate had increased 400% in San Francisco following the fluoridation of the water there. I
researched that statistic to its primary source, and found that it was true,
that according to The New England Journal of Medicine’s article on “Occurrence
of Thyroid Cancer in San Francisco” dated July 14, 1955, this had been the case. The link to this article can be found at:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM19….
A very academic study: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=…
A very well-researched and
well-cited paper detailing the undeniable connection between fluoride and
Thyroid Cancer can be found at: http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/Lfluoride…
Another: http://thyroid.about.com/od/drsrichkarilee…
Another: http://www.naturalthyroidchoices.com/Fluor…
And I could keep going. So you might wonder, when was I exposed to fluoride? Well, I lived in Beaverton for 3 years, and they fluoridate the water there.
Additionally, I was on Prozac for 4 years, which is very high in fluoride content. As well as other exposures over the past 35 years-toothpaste, pesticide residue on my produce, bottled beverages, and any naturally occurring fluoride in the environment.
My suspicion is that my Thyroid Cancer was caused by fluoride exposure.
Therefore if Portland fluoridates its water, then my cancer could return. I would really prefer that this not happen. I would really like to see William grow up.
And don’t delete my comment like Willamette Week did yesterday. I will post it over and over and over and tell everyone about it. If you have never had cancer at the age of 35 RIGHT AFTER YOU HAD A BABY then you cannot possibly understand my passion and tenacity. It is a force to be reckoned with. I will never shut up about the truth.
Basic research reveals the following:
1) All Portland schoolchildren between the ages of 3 and 5th grade can receive FREE fluoride tablets at school.
Districts served include:
■Portland Public School District
■Centennial School District
■David Douglas School District
■Gresham-Barlow School District
■Parkrose School District
■Reynolds School District
■Corbett School District
https://web.multco.us/health/school-fluori…
2) All uninsured Oregon children under the age of 18 are eligible for free/low-cost dental care coverage through the Oregon Health Plan.
http://www.oregonhealthykids.gov/families/…
3) There are quite a few dental clinics in our community that offer free/low-cost dental care to those who need it.
http://www.coalitionclinics.org/dental-res…
I myself grew up on free dental care from the Russell Street Dental Clinic in Portland. I did not grow up on fluoridated water. I have excellent teeth. My mother was just very diligent about taking me twice a year for cleanings and check-ups. We were very poor but she made it a priority.
I would bet that a large majority of the people opposing fluoridation also snicker at conservative Republicans who deny the existence of climate change. Apparently, scientific illiteracy knows no ideological boundaries.
The number of tinfoil hats that I have seen around town lately is astounding.
An unsigned editorial? The Merc has just jumped past the Willamette Week in stodginess with this one. I’m Looking forward to your upcoming editorials on climate change and creationism.
Is Wayne LaPierre on your news team? The logic of ‘There’s already stuff in the water, so we might as well dump more stuff in.’ sounds similar to ‘Criminals don’t obey the law, so we shouldn’t have laws.’
How sad. I grew up one of ten kids, we were by societies standards “poor”. Just the people this forced medication is supposed to ‘help’.
I have beautiful teeth because we ate a basic diet, oatmeal in the morning, beans, rice, tortillas, a little cheese. Sometimes peanut butter and other special meals. Treats were few and far between, mainly birthdays, we ate them up as soon as we could. Oh we also brushed off and on. We were all strong, slim, healthy. When someone got the measles, chicken pox or mumps others would come over to try and get it. That was the thinking, get exposed and develop immunity.
Now I see many get ‘free’ junk food for breakfast and lunch at school. Food as reward is rampant in schools and elsewhere. If the state cared about kids health they would first quit feeding all the junk food in schools; french toast, cinnamon buns, fries, hamburgers, hotdogs. Until they do that dental and other diseases will increase.
Flouride is a diversion instead of doing something meaningful do something the industrial fertilizer chemical industry needs to get rid of. Good job Mecrury adding to the insult.
@Gil Johnson: I don’t snicker at Republicans who deny the existence of climate change, because I happen to believe condescension is unhelpful and immature. I merely think they are wrong, based on the science. I also oppose fluoridation, based on the science. As I’ve already stated, I have a serious problem with the implications of this study, published in the journal NeuroToxicology, that silicofluorides (of which fluorosilic acid is one) increased lead levels in children, compared to sodium fluoride and no fluoride. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005… There are similar studies that suggest the same thing. I also have serious reservations about fluoride’s effect on kidneys for those with pre-existing kidney problems. I also philosophically oppose medicating a common water supply, regardless of the supposed benefits. Lastly, KATU’s research, using data from the state of Oregon, shows that current fluoridation is not preventing caries here. http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-30098-s…
Further proof of the ongoing corporate conspiracy to sell un-needed fluoride to the gullible masses: /sponsor-graphics/edit
Put listerine in the water! Less cavities it’s proven! (brought to you by the kind people of Listerine inc)
Aside from the obvious PR in this article, did the staff actually do any research of their own into where the Fluoride used in the water will come from? Had they done a proper job as a “reporter”, they would have learned that the majority of Fluoridation is sourced from industrial waste.
From the EPA: 95% what’s used in the process comes from the industrial waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry, in the form of sodium fluorosilicate and fluorosilicic acid. Which are classified as hazardous waste by the EPA. The other 5% source comes from the manufacture of hydrogen fluoride which is used in the manufacturing of solar panels and electronics.
Furthermore, industrial sources have been found to contain arsenic and lead, even though for the most part the NSF/ANSI standards are pretty stringent over purity so only rarely do the impurities happen. But still, do we really want to add even more junk to the water we drink?
Obviously there’s money to be had by passing off industrial waste as being “good” for us. And if Fluoridation passes, Portland will be yet another in a long string of suckers who buy into this B.S.
It is also painfully obvious that the Mercury needs cash, so took a big old donation for this piece of yellow journalism.
if they cared about your kid’s teeth, they would mail your kids free fluoride tablets. Portland’s water has always been so much better than the water in say california new york mexico hawaii etc, let’s have a bunch of transplant eastcoast hipsters and californians vote to change our city yeah!
Whoops, wrong clipboard paste. Oh well. There’s like 200 comments. No one will notice. Hell, I can just paste in random shit at this point and it will get ignored like everything else is getting ignored.Six years have passed since I resolved on my present undertaking. I can, even now, remember the hour from which I dedicated myself to thisgreat enterprise. I commenced by inuring my body to hardship. Iaccompanied the whale-fishers on several expeditions to the North Sea;I voluntarily endured cold, famine, thirst, and want of sleep; I oftenworked harder than the common sailors during the day and devoted mynights to the study of mathematics, the theory of medicine, and thosebranches of physical science from which a naval adventurer might derivethe greatest practical advantage.
Lorem ipsum, Graham.
This is ridiculous.
I just can’t bring myself to give a shit about this either way.
Thanks, Mercury, for letting us know you cannot be trusted.
The Mercury believes what the CDC says? They obviously haven’t seen The Walking Dead.
@C&B: For professional reasons, I have to repeatedly fill in a large number of text boxes with text over and over again. I find Lorem Ipsum to be some peasant-class shit. Real men use classic works from Gutenberg.
@David, all Portland Schoolchildren between the ages of 3 through 5th grade are eligible to receive FREE fluoride tablets at school.
https://web.multco.us/health/school-fluori…
I’m not going to get in the ridiculousness of this thread–not reading any other comments. But I do want to say THANK YOU for this! I agree and appreciate that the Mercury (as well as other news outlets) are fluoride supporters. Let’s hope common sense prevails.
calling it a “vast, VAST minority of dentists” that oppose flouridation makes it sound like there are a ton of dentists against it, and seems to weaken that part of your argument as it comes across the page.
maybe try a “miniscule minority” or something similar.
There are two things at work here: #1 white guilt. Mandating that an entire population drink fluoridated water will not absolve any racism that has occurred in your personal or collective history. And the NAACP’s endorsement for the Clean Water Campaign should wake you up to the fact that not all African Americans agree with fluoridation. #2 The belief in fluoride is a religion. In other words, it involves believing, not thinking. Furthermore, the Mercury has now just proved that their claim to be an alternative news source is entirely bogus. The Mercury is mainstream and it seems proud of it. OMG, what do you not get about informed consent and civil liberties..this mandate to drug the water is a clear violation of our civil rights. And dismissing chiropractors and acupuncturists for not being scientific like the CDC, what and the AMA? Those bastions of truth? Please!!!
Can we get back to talking about how vaccinations cause autism, please?
what about the fact that forcing medicine on people is just downright creepy?
Guys, you really need to check yourselves. First, the guilt tactic is no bueno. I’m sure it is not people’s intention to not take care of one another, but there are some studies that have been done that raise red flags, and people are RIGHT to be concerned about them. Money talks, and if you put enough research into finding out how good something is, and neglecting to put enough money into how bad something is, it makes for a compelling brainwash to use on people.
Secondly, I don’t know where you guys got your information about fluoride being a mineral, but that is absolutely false. I can tell you that without a doubt, but whether you would believe me or not is the question. Before your article misinforms people, I would STRONGLY encourage you to do further research on what chemistry defines fluoride as; chemical properties, how it reacts with other elements, MSDS information, and the like. If you’re nice, you may want to update your article.
Thirdly, I’m not sure where you guys got your statistics for rates of cavities in school children, how many doctors in Portland actually support fluoridation, how many doctors in Portland are against fluoridation, how many doctors in Portland are indifferent about fluoridation, what healthy doses of fluoride are, etc.., but I want your sources. ALL YOUR SOURCES ARE BELONG TO ME! Send me what you got. Post them as a comment in this thread.
This is the most amazing election ever
I thought this was a comment section. Why all the essays?
Point 1 response:
-Statistical evidence shows equal or even fewer cavities in our region when compared to a Fluoridated city of EQUIVALENT population and demographics.
-fluoride actually only effects teeth when applied topically. Ingesting fluoride kills “friendly” probiotic bacteria that your body depends on in your G.I. Tract. And also upsets the microbiological food chain from the bottom up.
– fluorides are not simply a natural mineral and therefore safe. It is a class of substances both natural and artificial ranging from slightly hazardous to extremely hazardous.
– the CDC actually posted a 187 page toxicology report on all known types of fluorides and fluorines which clearly defines hazards of long term exposure to standard “drinking water levels” of fluorosilic acid. Despite the CDC’s party line endorsement of fluoridation, many individuals within the CDC have spoken against fluoridation.
Point 2 response:
The argument of this point is that because they already put harmful chemicals into municipal water why should we be upset about 1 more?
This one is ridiculous and isn’t even worthy of a response.
Point 3 response:
Fluoride is not entirely undetectable to taste. It is very subtle and nearly indistinguishable to most people. That however, was not really an argument of anti fluoride folks.
Professional brewery’s know that boiling will dissipate chloramines from water before brewing begins. Unfortunately, Fluorides, and fluorines DON’T work that way. They will remain after boiling. The yeast cultures will fight against them every step of the way in fermentation and the culture will be weak when the batch is done. Will it taste different? No, but that’s irrelevant. The presence of fluoride in every part of our food supply in unpredictable concentrations is
Point 4 response:
-Dr. Wu claims that fluoride acts systemically. It get’s into your system and for a few hours you will secret fluoride with your saliva. The article also admits that this amount is not a sufficient topical amount to prevent tooth decay. It is sufficient to cause pancreatic, thyroid, liver, and kidney distress. This is known to the medical community to be true. The ADA is made up of dentists who deal with teeth. Not medical doctors who deal with organs.
The 1990 CDC report that gets spread around is 23 years old. Since that time there are volumes of data linking fluoride to a wide range of medical issues.
Point 5 response:
The argument here is that many things including fluoride are harmful in high enough doses. Well we are just discussing fluoride not the other things. -In the amounts that it would be administered (without consent) as a drug in the water supply it may be less harmful on entry, but fluid dynamics suggest that it will concentrate and diminish in an unpredictable way once it is out in the world. It is impossible to predict what individual dosages would be per person. As well as what other exposures each person would have.
-Philadelphia is paying an enormous amount of money to reduce the Fluoride in it’s municipal water, because the levels became (unpredictably) too high. This process is extremely difficult costly and inefficient for a city that has had devastating financial lows, yet they see this as a necessity and are spending the money.
-Fluoride, as stated above, is linked to a wide range of illnesses. Many people with those conditions, such as diabetics, cancer patients, etc… Are more sensitive to very small amounts of fluoride.
Did fluoride cause their conditions? Who knows, but these people have to live with weakened immune systems and hypersensitivity to toxicity.
-This speaks nothing to the ethical debate of whether it’s o.k. To force a population of people to ingest a medication against their will!
Point 6 response:
This argument suggests that the scientific and medical community is not equally divided about fluoridation. It also go’s on to question the validity of naturopathic and holistic medicine by simply stating that those forms of medicine have come under fire in the past by others.
– when speaking about the scientific and medical community we are not speaking locally we are speaking about the worldwide community and it’s body of knowledge which is divided if not largely against fluoridation.
Point 7 response:
The argument, if it makes one here, is that the Harvard study which showed evidence of fluoride actually reducing cognitive function in children was flawed. The proposed reason was that the study showed statistical analysis from an area in china with a high concentration of fluoride. It also tries to disqualify the study itself because of the route in which it became popularly cited.
– who cares if the study was posted on cracked.com and then reposted on Reuters? The fact is the Harvard study did take place and it did show evidence of children exposed to fluoride in drinking water having reduced cognitive function.
– the dosage in the Chinese municipal water was not ridiculously high in fact not much higher than Philadelphia’s peak area which prompted the city to pay to have fluoride levels reduced through processing.
– also the dosage of the study was by far less then dosages administered topically both by dentists and in many public schools (.25mg – 1.5mg)
-A study by Florida State University found that fluoride at .45 ppm by itself a strong enough sedative to significantly retard sensory and mental reaction time. .7 to 1.2 is the standard drinking water levels. Pharmaceutical companies began to pair it with other sedatives because it compounds and amplifies the effects. Fluoride paired with Valium becomes Rohypnol. Stelazinum is a powerful fluoride based sedative used in nursing homes and care facilities.
Whoever posts the highest word count wins?
More evidence to support NO on fluoridation. Press Conference today May 2, 2013
New Toxicity Test Confirms Arsenic in Fluoridation Chemicals Used in Oregon
At a press conference earlier this morning, Clean Water Portland, the Sierra Club and other opponents of fluoridation released results of tests on a sample of fluorosilicic acid (FSA) used to fluoridate water in Philomath. This is the same fluoridation chemical the Portland Water Bureau says would be used in Portland. The City of Philomath sent the FSA samples directly to a highly respected toxicity lab in Washington, and results were returned last week.
William Hirzy, Ph.D., a chemist at American University in Washington, D.C., said if the same compound is used in Portland, it would raise arsenic rates in the city’s water more than 12 percent above Portland’s highest recorded arsenic levels in 2012 (1.2 ppb). Hirzy’s recent study on the effects of arsenic levels in drinking water resulting from the addition of fluoridation chemicals is available at cleanwaterportland.org.
Did someone who was anti-fluoride come into the Mercury office and shit all over the floor while shouting “Clean water rules, your face drools!”?? This whole campaign was a lot nicer a couple weeks ago when certain people weren’t running around accusing others of wearing tinfoil hats and being up there with gun nuts and climate change deniers. No wonder there are nearly 200 comments here, you’re giving people a reason to feel like they need to defend themselves. The thing that shocks me the most about this article is not that you all barely expand on any idea but that you’re so damn rude to the other side.
I’m sorry the lack of fluoride in Portland ate your baby. I’m sorry the lack of fluoride in Portland dumped pig blood on you at your prom. I’m sorry the lack of fluoride in Portland convinced you try to try anal sex and then didn’t call you back. But maybe stop hurtling out insults and instead try to engage in an intelligent debate so we can all move forward with this and not hate each other when it’s all over. Or better yet, stop trying to post about political issues and go back to letting me know if the cocktails at Church are worth Bay Area prices.
@Steve R: There’s no prize for last place, if that’s what you’re going for.
I use to volunteer for a youth shelter in Portland and We gave out tooth paste and brushes constintley and there is many programs kids can get into for dental work. I also lived in NY and WA, they have fluoride in their water. I also brush my teeth twice a day and Guess what, I still got cavities. If you think kids teeth will get better from drinking fluoride, it won’t . If the kids get cavities it’s there own fault or their parents not making sure they brush.
Taking all comments on this thread into account, you have collectively written 20,013 words on this topic.
Hey Denis, et al., where’s your Blogtown post on the arsenic test CWP just released?
This is what I don’t understand: The antis argue that fluoride accumulates in the body and is toxic at any level and that it takes really expensive filters to totally remove it, filters that poor people can’t afford, but then they argue that poor children can always get fluoride tablets/treatment at school.
@Erik Littlefeather: What don’t you understand? People are saying that they don’t like fluoride, don’t want it in their systems, but if other people feel differently that, yes, there is a free and voluntary program in schools “for the children”.
Hi, I would like to see the media talk more about the SEVERE dental decay that has been happening to children. My child had to undergo surgery, under general anesthesia, because his teeth were so bad. We are not low income, uneducated, crappy parents as some would believe. He had seven crowns placed and it cost us $3,000 after insurance. I’m hardly the first parent this has happened to – a friend of mine had a child that also had to undergo a similar procedure. This isn’t just “cavities” this is a huge problem. And contrary to what some may think, my son has a fairly decent diet – he’s never had soda in his life, had juice very few times (like under 10) and his sugar intake low. I think you guys would do a great deal of service to the community to discuss just how extensive the problem really is.
A buddy of mine has a lady friend who is severely allergic to fluoride. Now, she’ll have to shower with the shit all over herself.
Anyone who thinks that employees of the Portland Mercury are monitoring these comments for pearls of wisdom is a goddamned idiot. Also, everyone in these comments is a goddamned idiot.
The Mercury did get at least 10 or so new registered commenters from this! Way to go fluoride.
What is the white guilt thing I don’t even
I wish I had the certitude of the Portland Mercury regarding flouride. Do we know what is causing the number of cancer cases, the number of people with multiple chemical sensitivies, obesity, Alzheimer’s? I don’t, but apparently you know that chemicals play no part. Do tell us in the next issue what is causing all of the epidemic’s in health.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/kr…
http://www.pugetsoundaazk.org/2009conferen…
http://cof-cof.ca/2012/09/artificial-water…
http://www.kingcounty.gov/healthservices/health/n…
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fluoride-…
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof/_pgg2.php3
http://www.kidney.org/atoz/pdf/Fluoride_Intake_in…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17420053
http://www.naturalnews.com/031317_fluoride_iodine…
http://www.scribd.com/doc/121795065/Christopher-B…
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2…
http://www.globalresearch.ca/poison-is-tre…
http://www.katu.com/news/problemsolver/Bef…
http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-30098-s…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=q0VRgs…
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/17/the_fluorid…
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1015148353…
Clearly, Seth, they haven’t blogged about the arsenic test yet because they don’t have as much free time as you do to type up verbose essays or cite flawed studies.
I mean, the Harvard study? The one predominantly conducted in China where fluoridated drinking water ISN’T ubiquitous? The one that mentions a “possibility” of an effect — but did not actually conclude that there is an effect?
Huh.
Must really chap your ass that those “misinformed journalists” are smarter than you are…
Oh! Silly me.
The Mercury probably hasn’t blogged about the arsenic tests because the Oregonian is already tearing CWP’s work down. Perhaps you should run over there and dazzle them with your insight and wit?
IT’S FOR DA CHILDRENZZZ!!!11
I wish I had faith in snake oil vital wellness coaching. (IS THAT ADVERTISING I SEE)
Why isn’t anyone thinking of the vagina dentata
Anyone have the full story about Evyn Mitchell showing up to a Clean Water Oregon meeting drunk as fuck and bragging about how her Bachelors in Marketing makes her so much smarter than everyone there with their silly medical PhDs? Sounded hilarious, just wondering if anyone else heard about it or had more details.
Anyone have the full story of me showing up to your butt drunk as fuck?
I would simply like to know who stands to profit monetarily from this. I cannot seem to find any information about which company or companies the city is considering signing contracts with for the purchase of the fluoridation chemical(s). Anyone have any clue? I think this is a very important piece of information that is being left out of the discussion.
To “disastronaut” who said:
“How about the argument that the government should not force the involuntary ingestion of ANY drugs, regardless of their health benefit?”
The answer, you moron, is that you don’t face “involuntary ingestion” of water. The market, which I assume is your panacea, provides you with an alternative. You can drink un-fluoridated water that you pay for. If, on the other hand, you drink the water that the CITY provides and pumps to your taps, you assume an implied contract. You accept the cities management of that water.
God what an idiot.
@Roger: Check again. I didn’t say that, dipshit.
How embarrassing.
@Roger – I plan to use the free market if this doesn’t pass – by filling up jugs with Vancouver tap water and bringing it over the border to drink. I don’t want to drink this unwholesome Portland water just to satisfy the tinfoil-hat crowd.
And I would also suggest Googling the water quality reports for cities with fluoridated water, such as Seattle, Kansas City, Denver, Pittsburgh, and Milwaukee – none show elevated levels of arsenic, and only Denver’s shows elevated lead levels (caused by leaching from pipes).
Clean Water Portland is using scare tactics about “chemicals” and “arsenic and lead” to scare people away from an inexpensive public health solution to tooth decay.
I lived in Montgomery Co., Maryland where I grew up in 50s & 60s with one of the first fluoridated water systems. My parents both had a terrible time with cavities. I am 63. No cavities. Bones and other organs so far just fine. Just saying.
Real statistics on how Mult. Co. cavity rates are higher per capita than similar-sized cities who fluoridate would be helpful. This article’s bias is not obscured in any manner. After all, they do have their advertisers to feed don’t they?
Channel 8 just reported that a chemical analysis was done on Philomath’s “Flouridation Chemicals” (the same chemicals that are going to be used in Portland) and the results show disturbingly high levels of Arsenic, Aluminum, Chromium, and Selenium, as well as concerning levels of lead, cadmium, and mercury. I just can’t believe that people don’t realize (or maybe just don’t care)-YOU WILL BE DRINKING THIS STUFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Christina – please compare the levels of the elements you mention to EPA standards, or else you’re just a scare-mongering conspiracy theorist.
I’m sure what I’m about to say has been said idk at least 10 times out of 224 proceeding comments. Fluoride does occur at trace levels in our environment but there is sound scientific evidence showing that our local ecology would not like the amount of fluoride added to our water supply by treated wastewater discharge, which does not remove fluoride. The reason there is not a lot of science to back up the few studies that exist is because no one is researching it. Allowing some people who are willing and able to pony up the money to do a long term risk assessment study can put this bit to rest, but until the science actually backs up the claim that fluoride doesn’t negatively affect our local ecology, this gets a no vote from me. I believe the person who wrote this article would do themselves a service by researching this issue a bit farther than, “Fluoride naturally occurs in our water, so you’re wrong, and we dump lye in our water so it’s fine.” That’s adapting a dangerous rationale in my opinion, and seems like lazy reporting by you guys. I still believe this is an issue that was largely ignored by both sides of the debate.
Communities Which Have Rejected Fluoridation Since 1990
http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/commu…
Communities that Have Rejected Fluoridation Since 2010
http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/commu…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdsK4O1E-J8
The second comment on this thread nailed it, for me.
It’s funny how the article portrays the vote no campaign as “anti-fluoride”. Will people that crusade against rape be classified as “anti-sex”? I’m sure most no voters brush their teeth with fluoride toothpaste. They just don’t want their water supply polluted.
having a niece and nephew who suffer from fluorosis, i can tell you this is not a make believe issue and the cause wasn’t from parental neglect. it was due to a municipality over-fluoridating the public water. it is ugly and degrades teeth and bones. while these issues might be minute, they do predicate concern.
Wow! Glad to see so many people educated about the dangers of Fluoride. I helped get signatures last year for Clean Water Portland. Only idiots are dumb enough to believe the liberal pussy lies and biased propaganda of corporate fascist New World Order America. I’d say more, but fellow patriots of mine above already have LOL. Thanks guys keep it up! And just remember everytime you pick up a Portland Mercury you are reading pussy liberal biased neo Nazi propaganda.
I wonder if the same people who bitch and moan about the fluoride in Portland’s water supply worried about the contents of the ink in their tattoos?
Come on people, let’s call it what it is.
Has anyone here actually read a mercury piece (if you can even call it that) before this? Because I sure haven’t. Stop encouraging these idiots and their publicity stunts. Remember, they HAD to – they need readers. Journalism is dead.
I lost some respect for your dumb ass, smart ass paper after reading this really shitty article. I hope you DID receive some money from a corporate douche association… You do not help children’s teeth this way. Adding chemicals to a municipal water supply has nothing to do with children’s dental health. Vote NO NO NO. When I lite camp fires this summer, I will take pleasure in using a Mercury and not Nickel Ads, or the WW, or Exotic. If they do start adding these chemicals I will feel good about tossing water balloons on you fools this winter too. Mercury Staff can go get fucked.
@Yinzer V-“scare-mongering conspiracy theorist”? Wow, that is really offensive. I will say, however, that you are smart for being one of HKHP’s paid thugs. Just remember that others are too. I have a Master of Arts in Teaching, and a Bachelor of Arts in English, as well as being a CANCER SURVIVOR and a very happy artist mommy. Let’s play nice, ok? However, since you asked, here is a metal by metal comparison of the EPA limits vs. what was discovered in Philomath’s “Fluoridation Chemicals” last month. And just for everyone’s reading pleasure, any adverse health effects from exceeding these limits, straight from the EPA’s own website! (And yes, indeed I do have a copy of the report in my hand. How lovely!!!)
ARSENIC (Skin damage or problems with circulatory systems, and may have increased risk of getting cancer)
EPA Limit 0.010 mg/L
Philomath 46.5 mg/L
ALUMINUM (No side effects)
EPA Limit .05-.2 mg/L
Philomath 6.93 mg/L
MERCURY (Kidney damage)
EPA Limit .002 mg/L
Philomath .004 mg/L
LEAD (Infants and children: Delays in physical or mental development; children could show slight deficits in attention span and learning abilities
Adults: Kidney problems; high blood pressure)
EPA Limit ZERO
Philomath .002
CHROMIUM (Allergic dermatitis)
EPA Limit .1 mg/L
Philomath 1.55 mg/L
SELENIUM (Hair or fingernail loss; numbness in fingers or toes; circulatory problems)
EPA Limit .05 mg/L
Philomath .4 mg/L
CADMIUM (Kidney damage)
EPA Limit .005 mg/L
Philomath .008
And just for fun, these are the side effects of exceeding the EPA limit for Flouride, which is 4 mg/L: Bone disease (pain and tenderness of the bones); Children may get mottled teeth.
steve h: http://cof-cof.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/… is the actual study I’m referring to.
Total fluoride discharges will be similar to the plant in 1982 when mass die-offs were detected before they had to reduce discharges. This is just one life form harmed at low concentrations. Certainly others would be as well.
steve h: also, be sure to check out some history of the fish/fluoride debate: http://www.nofluoride.com/Salmon.cfm
As a physician, a native of a city that fluoridated it’s water, and a member of thebCareOregon board, I need to debunk some of these STUPID comments.. The most vunerable of our children are missing school because of tooth decay. When I see patients bring their 1 year old in with soda or juice drinks in the bottle, I talk to them about theirs kids teeth. A lot of people do not know better. Some if it is cultural. For instance, in the Black community, my community, babies as young as 3-4months are started on juice. Most of the physicians in Portland, who are white, do not know that. Cultural incompetence keeps them from better informing the parents. Fluoride would help these babies.
Let me put it to you like this. Better education now, means someone is less likely to rob Your house later. If the kid is missing weeks worth of school due to dental pain now, where are they going to be financially in ten years?
At Dr. Selina: Treating the problem you describe with fluoride in the water is like prescribing caffeine in the water for habitual drunks. What we need to do instead is stop the problem at its source – advise them to stop giving their kids juice and soda. And if you don’t, no amount of fluoride is going to fix the problem.
@Lewcifer Using rape as a simile to fluoride is uh, yeah.
@Christina – you seriously are comparing a supposed sample of the undiluted fluoridation supplements with EPA standards for drinking water? (Only enough will be added to increase the fluoride content to 0.7 ppm, while the undiluted substance is ~40% H2SiF6 and fluoride ions.)
Just typical Clean Water Portland deception. 1.) That study should be made public, so the chain of custody and actual report can be studied; Clean Water Portland has a history of selective quoting of studies (especially the Grosjean/Choi Chinese study) to argue their point. 2.) Philomath’s own water quality report shows levels of unwanted elements well within EPA standards, including no detectable arsenic. 3.) Clean Water Portland commenters on other boards have been quoting some analysis of a batch of H2SiF6 from 1990, which is irrelevant to the issue at hand; the fluoridation supplements that Portland will use will conform to American Water Works Association standards; standards that have been modified over the years, with the H2SiF6 standard last revised in 2011.
Nice work. Cuts through the myths, conspiracies, half truths, and untruths. Let’s hope common sense prevails. Well written. Good common sense article.
Israel to stop mandatory fluoridation of water within one year.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/israe…
The Mercury is on the wrong side of history. The name calling pro-fluoride camp needs to take a look in the mirror.
lol at the pro-fluoride camp supposedly being the ones that are name callers.
So many new members just to comment on this “article”. My favorite are the ones that are agreeing with one another’s one and only comment. Probably totally not the same person with multiple accounts.
At tcraighenry: As far as I can tell, you only post on here to snipe in one or two lines, then disappear for a while only to reappear and do the same thing. What substance are you providing? You can lol all you want, but you’re the exact person who should look in the mirror.
Things that won’t pass in Oregon: weed, fluoride
Things that did: gay marriage ban
Super progressive, everybody! Good job!
Well the disappearing is because like, I can’t be here all the time. Sorry about that. I know you miss my wit.
You’re missing the point FLORIDE IS TOXIC. Poor people do brush their teeth. FLORIDE IS TOXIC. It was first used in the concentration camps because! It makes people dumb and a little angy. ALSO WATER SHOULD NOT HAVE INGREDIANTS.. TOO MUCH FLORIDE IS TOXIC? WELL THEN i HOPE I DONT drink ‘too much water’.
The mercury has been a total cia tool since they started. Let’s all just ignore them THEY WILL GO AWAY. yay. loose your jobs. loose your ads!! pull ads from mercury. Watching ann ramano eat out of a dumpster will be Way more entertaining anyway
Seattle has fluoride and we have motherfuckin’ orcas. What do you got, Portland? Salmon? Fuck yo salmon! Our orcas eat them!
Orcas don’t care. Shit, google them, look at those awesome teeth. How’d you get such awesome teeth, Mr. Orca? Or Mrs.! Or Mz.! Or just click-click-eee-eee! We are progressive up here, and you orcas can marry same sex orcas while smoking pot! So why are you so awesome?
Fluoride, that’s why. Boom.
Yeah, the state of Oregon is trying to poison its inhabitants, alongside its Politicians, State workers, Government workers, children grandpa’s and police men, all at once.
Use your head.
At Leaky 2.0 oz: (Circa 1957) Yeah, the FDA is trying to create birth defects by allowing Thalidomide.
Use your head.
Moral: Well-intentioned people are capable of making mistakes.
No real data to show that Fluoride reduces cavity rates among low-income children in comparatively sized communities that fluoridate. Too many variables to skew the data, i.e. subsidy rates for pediatric dental care, ethnicity (diets high in sugar vs diets low in sugar) – sure the fluoridation opponents are whack, but why is the science all over the map? Why do some high-level studies disagree with CDC studies? CDC studies of other issues have been wrong. Common sense dictates when in doubt, avoid adding more substances, hence complexity to the problem. Begin with reducing substances first – for instance: sugar.
Yinzer V, wow…I have an actual copy of an actual INDEPENDENT chemical analysis done on the “Fluoridation Chemicals” used in Philomath, the same wonderful company that will be supplying the “Fluoridation Chemicals” for Portland. It is not a “supposed” report. It is the real deal. I will scan it and email it to anyone who would like to see it for themselves. Only INDEPENDENT testing can be trusted, everybody knows that. It would be the equivalent of “peer review” that your cronies are espousing over on the HKHP thread, which I got banned from for posting these very BASIC SCIENTIFIC FACTS. I can’t believe how rude all you paid thugs are being on these social forums. And that Portlanders are actually falling for this crap. I guess that must be your strategy though, divide and conquer, eh?
Roughly three-quarters of all Americans currently drink flouridated water, and the resulting health catastrophe has obviously been completely covered up by a conspiracy between the American Dental Association, The U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services, the United Nations and the Bilderbergs, because you NEVER HEAR ABOUT IT!!!
SERIOUSLY, GUYS! CONSPIRACY!!! IT’S THE ONLY EXPLANATION!!!
At Christopher Comte: Or maybe instead of people dropping dead and it being covered up, there are just subtle, mostly unprovable things that happen, like increases in kidney disease, subtle IQ differences from silicofluorides increasing lead levels, increased thryroid problems, none of which are traceable to fluoride except if you both have the will and the resources to produce studies that look for them, and have a control group that now doesn’t exist.
And when they *do* actually look, they find things like this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005… (increased lead levels in children with silicofluorides vs sodium fluoride and no fluoride)
@ Homer, wouldn’t it be, that circa 1957 the FDA accidentally almost created birth defects, or they just picked one or 20 or 80 in a bunch and said, here, birth defects by allowing Thalidomide.
@Christina – anti-fluoride people have compared fluoridation to rape and Nazism on this thread. I would think that is rude.
If you have the report, scan it and put it up on the Clean Water Portland website so we can take a look at the whole report, just like we can look up the Grossjean/Choi study (the Chinese study) that Clean Water Portland selectively quoted from. The Philomath water quality report is available online from the City of Philomath’s web page; I have accessed it.
I’d be curious to know how many fluoridation opponents:
* already own expensive water filtration systems
* spend 100s on unproven nutritional supplements
* believe childhood vaccinations cause autism
* believe in homeopathy
* have their kids in charter schools
* call themselves progressive while espousing hard-core libertarianism
It’s beyond libertarianism at this point, Steve. With the push-polls and bizarre arsenic scare stories, they’re firmly into Rove territory now.
Evolution. Check. Global warming. Check. Fluoride. Check.
At Steve R: Why? Is it because it’s easier for you to lump those with genuine scientific concerns about the safety of fluoride in with loonies than it is to do the more difficult job of researching the science and their arguments and rebutting those arguments intelligently?
If I told you substance X was proposed to be put in the water, and there are credible studies, one of which is in the journal Neurotoxicology, that definitively, statistically demonstrate an increase in lead levels in children vs not having it in there, and no one has rebutted that study, what would you conclude? If you’re honest, you and everyone you know would immediately demand it not be in the water. But somehow, when Substance X is fluoride, you trust “the experts” more than yourself. Why?
AP: Drugs found in drinking water
Updated 9/12/2008
A vast array of pharmaceuticals — including antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones — have been found in the drinking water supplies of at least 41 million Americans.
People take pills. Their bodies absorb some of the medication, but the rest of it passes through and is flushed down the toilet. The wastewater is treated before it is discharged into reservoirs, rivers or lakes. Then, some of the water is cleansed again at drinking water treatment plants and piped to consumers. But most treatments do not remove all drug residue.
Another issue: There’s evidence that adding chlorine, a common process in conventional drinking water treatment plants, makes some pharmaceuticals more toxic.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation…
Fuck you for putting the MAN WOLFS alongside the caption on the cover!!! I want to keep kids healthy by NOT flouridating the water! Flouridation started by the nazis to dumb down the IQ of other countries. Look it up. Thanks for not mentioning the costs that this crap will cost btw. AND if they are even POTENTIAL RISKS with this shit and not a direct correlation, I’m sure as hell not going to take it with anyone’s kids! Lastly, the article doesn’t mention how it isn’t using naturally occuring Flouride, but FSA, which is an unpurified byproduct of industrial fertilizer manufacturing, not the flouride found in toothpaste! Also look into “Flourosis,” which is the main threat to over-use. Like a commentor on here already said, how much is a low dose, high, etc. How much can you ingest and it be ok? Or before it cause damage? Too much of anything is not good.
@ Steve R. & kungfu:
That’s the thing — I think an extreme majority of the people that are anti-fluoridation (especially those that regularly read this publication) are firm believers in evolution and global warming, and think things like homeopathy and the idea that vaccines-equal-autism are bullshit. That’s what makes this debate so odd — it’s one of the very few where the lefties are split.
@Happy_Hippo, I think people believe that waste water treatment magically removes or diludes toxins to undetectable levels before it reenters the water supply. Once again as I have in the past, I’d like to point out that the city consulted with exactly ZERO surface water specialists before voting to fluoridate the water supply. Our local ecology is very unique, and in turn extremely sensitive to minor fluxes in chemical composition. If you live here, and enjoy going outside, and enjoy the nature here, you’re on the hook to protect it. Please don’t let politicians force through irresponsible practices on the local level.
Have pets?
“Environmental Working Group found that eight major brands of dog and puppy foods have up to 2.5 times more fluoride than the E.P.A.’s maximum legal dose allowed in drinking water. (Maximum legal allowable fluoride in water is 4ppm however the recommended amount that water companies add to water is 0.7ppm). These 8 brands of dog foods contain an average of 9mg of fluoride per kilogram of dog food. Ouch.
On the up side, the study also tested two dog food brands that do not contain detectible levels of fluoride: one is made with vegetarian ingredients and the other is made by a small manufacturer.
Little research has been done on the effect of fluoride on dogs. However in 2006 the National Research Council published research noting numerous adverse health risks of fluoride on humans, including disruption of the brain, kidneys and thyroid, bone fractures and joint pain (among others).
Worth noting is: the amount of fluoride in the tested pet foods is higher than the amount of fluoride associated with the development of bone cancer (osteosarcoma) in young boys. Speaking of osteosarcoma, nearly 10 times as many dogs get this deadly and painful bone cancer each year as people do. Is it possible that osteosarcoma in dogs might be tied to fluoride consumption – like it is for boys? To date, no research has been done on this question.”
This is a good, quick read. http://fluoridedetective.com/pets/
I am really appalled by the ridiculous article you’ve put out. First and foremost, the large majority of these alleged concerns that the opponents of fluoride have are ridiculous.
Fluoride is yet another one of the “ingredients” that have been added to our environment and bodies without our direct consent, and most importantly, without extensive study. Sure, some studies may find that fluoride, topically, can strengthen tooth enamel. The studies that haven’t been done are the systemic effects. What’s even worse, is that you literally write in the article (regarding the cancer aspect of the debate) that there is conflicting findings in studies regarding cancer. CANCER. why in the WORLD are we even humoring fluoride when there haven’t been enough studies to prove, concretely, that we, and the other inhabitants of this planet, aren’t negatively affected?!?
The truth is, this planet is already full of our byproducts from industry. The chemicals we find in our bodies and bloodstreams are alarming. They often originate from chemical, pharmaceutical, and agricultural industry byproducts. The overall health of the average person in this country is not good. The low-income regions and minority groups are struggling even more. To ADD yet another chemical to the mix (and if i hear one more time that the industrial byproduct version of fluoride that will be used is “natural”, i will scream) to aid in preventing dental caries, only to increase the rate of organ and glandular issues, what sort of help are we offering?
I think it is insulting to think that we, as a city full of dedicated, positive, and progressive people, are told to resort to further chemically treating the water rather than investing that money into an empowering alternative.
Fluoride won’t teach populations we’re concerned for about the many components that increase the risk for dental caries and discomfort. Fluoride won’t teach our children to brush, to not drink soda and processed foods. Fluoride won’t teach our children the value of hygiene. Most importantly, fluoride won’t pass down that knowledge from generation to generation, enabling a cyclical and growing rate of education and empowerment through personal action.
For the amount of money that the city is proposing to use towards the fluoridation facility, we could build, staff and stock multiple mobile dental units that could be transported to areas in the city, including schools, where children are having issues. They could be set up in neighborhoods to allow families to participate in their health together. Wouldn’t you rather see that level of comradery than to set up a plant for chemical disposal?!?
I see the pessimists’ side. They want to believe that people can’t change. They want to believe that social work and assisting others by means of action and community is in vain. I think that it is the entire premise of being a human- to assist, to nurture, to discover. We could be doing those things.
So, stop using the whole “bandwagon appeal.” Portland has never been on the bandwagon. Portland has done a phenomenal job (quite inspirational, really) at going against the grain and surpassing other cities in their innovative alternatives.
Most well reasoned, Sonja,
Now in your opinion, WHY is flouride REALLY being pushed?
Hey, Portland Mercury – did you know the US is one of a very few number of first world countries who add fluoride to any of their municipal water supplies? Most European countries have examined, and then rejected water fluoridation. For good reasons. And guess what? Do any of those non-fluoridated countries have greater amounts of cavities? Nope. You may have also missed the study done by KATU when the public records request also showed that Oregon communities showed no significant difference between those with fluoridated water vs. those without (EXCEPT for Portland, which has about 5% fewer cavities – some crisis, eh?).
You may not also know that municipal water supply fluoride is made from industrial waste byproducts. None of it is pharmaceutical grade fluoride (too costly), neither is it guaranteed not to be harmful by its suppliers.
Finally… love the argument that there are already low levels of fluoride in our water. There are also low levels of arsenic. Should we add more of that, too?
One of the biggest Mercury fails, EVER.
Activism through commenting on the Mercury website!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/janua…
The CDC and the ADA warns against using fluoridated water with baby formula. Is this not reason enough?
Fluoride supporters are well-meaning do-gooders. They are well aware that anyone who wants fluoride can get it, but they are worried about the social equity of cavities (poor kids get them more than rich kids who presumably get fluoride pills from their doctors). They fail to take into account the growing masses of people who can’t cope with the toxics in their environments. 15% of school kids are now diagnosed with ADHD and while no one knows what causes it, everyone pretty much agrees that toxics exacerbate it at least. Portland already has terrible air quality. Do we really need to burden the underclass of the health world by putting toxics in the water too? I am certain that this campaign suffers from shortsightedness and probably more than a little self-righteousness. A lot of money is getting spent to convince good hearted people that this is the right thing to do…but it isn’t. Before you vote, read the facts: http://www.katu.com/news/problemsolver/Bef…
The Mercury is the FOX news of weeklies.
People in Beaverton have fluoridated water.
Have you been down to the “entertainment zone” blocks lately?
Yea, please vote NO.
Honestly, I’m kind of on the fence here but have been slowly leaning more and more towards the anti-fluoridation people. The reason is because despite that this debate has been going on for quite some time none of the questions raised by anti-fluoride people have been addressed in a reasonable matter. At first I expected these “conspiracy” theories to be put swiftly to bed by someone simply releasing some actual scientific studies with irrefutable proof that fluoride in the water is safe and effective. But none have come to light. The pro-fluoride groups, this Mercury article, and just about every comment on here that is for the measure resort to the same tactics: making jokes and/or saying trust the (insert some group we should trust without evidence ). Why not just present some evidence?
I grew up with fluoridated water and have enough cavities to prove that the water didn’t prevent them. The cavities were not the result of clean drinking water. They were the result of poor dental hygiene and a diet of sugary foods and drinks. The problem that kids are having isn’t caused by non-fluoridated water. Clean water does NOT cause tooth decay. The problem is cultural and socio-economical. I suspect that poor kids don’t drink a lot of water when they can get two-liter bottles of cola for a buck. If adding fluoride to the water didn’t prevent my cavities, it won’t prevent theirs; changing our consumption and hygiene behaviors will.
Sonja won
I grew up in various places with fluoridated water and have good teeth! My sister did too and has bad teeth!
There’s my anecdotal evidence for the day.
“In its proposed prohibition on sulfuryl fluoride, EPA acknowledged that the pesticide’s residues on food are “responsible for a tiny fraction of aggregate fluoride exposure” but deemed that children’s total contact with fluoride in the environment — through drinking water as well as toothpaste — posed an excess risk of tooth and bone damage.”
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/01/11/11…
@sethwoolley I like how in your opening paragraph you mention you didn’t actually read the article. I didn’t read your other paragraphs, let’s hope you did a better job.
The Fluoridated toothpaste that the Mercury’s staff uses has a warning printed right on the label. The warning reads that if a person accidentally swallows some they should call poison control. My Fluoride-Free toothpaste has no such warning. After reading their cover story I’ll be living Portland Mercury-Free as well. Vote NO on 26-151; It’s the sane human thing to do.
96% of Europe does not add fluoride to its water, and Germany has banned fluoride all together. The Mercury is paid-for main-stream media cloaked in its “alternative” dressings.
Prozac, whose scientific name is fluoxetine, is 94% fluoride. “Any person who drinks artificially fluoridated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically”. -Charles Eliot Perkins, prominent U.S. industrial chemist. NO on 26-151!
VolvoGuy is wrong. Prozac’s chemical formula is C17H18F3NO, which means that it contains 17 atoms of carbon, 18 atoms of hydrogen, 3 atoms of fluorine, and one atom each of nitrogen and oxygen.
All natural fluorine is F-19, so the three atoms of fluorine have a mass of 57. The fluoxetine molecule has a molecular mass of 309.33 g·mol−1. Do the math; it’s much less than 94% fluorine.
Ha! Yinzer V is wrong, and perhaps a troll. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfgewAieQW4 Don’t “medicate” our water supply. Vote NO on 26-151.
CHARLES ELIOT PERKINS
The ‘Perkins’ story:
http://www.fluoridationfacts.com/education…
Harley Rivers Dickinson (An Australian Liberal MP) who raised the issue of fluoridation and its sinister implications in an “Address in Reply to the Governor’s speech in Parliament.” The ‘Address’ forms part of a document compiled by Ian E Stephens and is appropriately entitled the ‘Dickinson Statement’ (“the Statement”). The main thrust of the Address was as follows;-
“At the end of the Second World War, the United States Government sent Charles Eliot Perkins, a research worker in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology, to take charge of the vast Farben chemical plants in Germany. While there he was told of a scheme which had been worked out by them during the war and adopted by the German General Staff. This was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water. In this scheme sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual’s power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narcotisizing a certain area of the brain and will thus make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him. Both the Germans and the Russians added sodium fluoride to the drinking water of prisoners-of-war to make them stupid and docile.” (Reference: Victorian Hansard of 12th August 1987). Also see Dr Phyllis Mullenix.
HA!
what the F mercury…? REALLY?
Pathetic “Journalism”. For you to print a piece that is so one-sided is just masterbatory …. nothing but an opinion piece. In MY opinion my kids shouldn’t have to ingest Fluoride every time they take a sip of water…. that ALONE is a valid enough reason to keep it out.
While so many places have fluoridated water so many others, ALL over the world (Germany, The Netherlands, Canada. etc, etc) have/ are taking it out. The argument FOR is nothing but misleading. Why don’t you take high fructose corn syrup out of school lunches; how bout access to dental care; how bout education! fuck you for printing such an opinionated one-sided piece on such a loaded issue… pathetic.
The new title of this piece: “THE MERCURY’S BIGGEST FAILURE”.
People can die from drinking too much water. WATER IS POISON. Vote to keep water out of the hands of children!
Also, we don’t need libraries because kids have books for free at school. Besides, how much do libraries cost? We have other priorities? And who’s profiting from this library thing? Corporate publishers.
It’s just a conspiracy of the military-industrial complex! Vote NO on sanity!
Poorest piece of muckraking journalism I’ve ever fuckin’ heard. Fuck you Mercury for printing an opinion under the guise of journalism.
Well, just filled out my ballot and voted YES, though I am concerned that it may not pass with all the stupidity I’m reading here.
Hippies and Conspiracy Theorists Unite!
To include the dumb chick who thinks her masters in teaching and bachelor in english should impress me more than the reccomendation of the American Medical Assoc., the American Dental Assoc, or the vast majority of pediatricians throughout the country.
ugh the comments. hipsters just need something to complain about. life is just TOO PLEASANT!!!! go to africa and drink their all-natural water you hippie bastards.
“Some, like Portland dentist Jay Harris Levy, will speak eloquently—uninterrupted for many minutes—on a slew of studies and the mass toll they feel fluoride’s having on society. But there’s hardly a schism. These folks are in the vast, vast minority.”
Why should being in the minority negate the legitimacy of his the argument? As Orwell said, “In a time of Universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”.
Fuck you, Mercury, for using such cheap tricks to spread propoganda at the expense of Portlanders. I though this beautiful city and your paper were safe havens for those who think outside the box- for those who don’t just accept what they are told, because everyone else seems to be doing it. The rest of the US seems to flouridate their water, so that makes it right?
Fuck you. I would certainly pay much more in taxes for giving people in need free and qulality dental care if that’s what this is really about.
And what’s wrong with conspircay theories? Why is that so stigmatized? Is it really so stupid to look thoroughly and openly at all possibilities before deciding what seems credible? What makes you so trusting of what the Government says anyway?
Sounds like you were paid off.
WHY ARE MOST FOOD MARKETED TO CHILDREN LOADED WITH SUGAR & HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP?
WHY NOT FLOURIDATE CHOCOLATE MILK INSTEAD OF OUR TAP WATER?
I am glad I can afford a water filter…..
If we put birth control in the drinking water we would have a lot fewer children with cavities.
Does that mean we should put birth control in the water supply?
Justifying the use of chemicals in our drinking water is FLAWED LOGIC.
We need FEWER additives to our drinking water, not more!
Hey Christopher, wake up man! 99.9% of conspiracy theories are pure crap. They are stigmatized by the quality of the people making them and by usual foolish reasoning.
Conspiracy Theories are said to flourish in times of public mistrust…
Which obviously must be the case here for all these folks to think putting fluoride in the water is going to nefariously harm them.
Despite the advice of doctors and dentists.
Dentists putting money into this campaign with no financial gain to be made, and in fact, most likely to lose money eventually through better teeth in the populace.
Well, don’t worry anti-fluoride folks – so the AMA and the ADA doesn’t support you, you still have Jenny McCarthy on your side.
Peer-reviewed studies have shown that LSD is an effective treatment for illnesses such as alcoholism, PTSD, etc. Many people suffering from such heavily debilitating conditions can’t afford to purchase LSD or have difficulty getting access. Some of them end up in critical condition, even to the point of requiring emergency hospital visits and operations. So, in the name of humanitarian intervention and common decency, I propose we put LSD in our public water supply.
The city is quoted as saying that they intend to spend upwards of $500,000 to purchase fluorosilicic acid, the chemical used in water fluoridation. They have yet to say where they will be purchasing it from, but most of it comes from China nowadays.
I wonder how much cashola other municipalities across the country pay to fluoridate their water?
And what was that about a $5-7 million dollar treatment facility?
Of course other than that, there’s no financial gain to be made. After all, think of the high cost of dental care that that the magical elixir fluoride helps prevent. So what if there’s no conclusive evidence that water fluoridation actually does anything to prevent tooth decay?
But at least the phosphate fertilizer industry hasn’t had to pay to dispose of their fluoride pollution, classified hazardous waste, in decades.
Congratulations to the “Whole Mercury Team” for using team work in being complete fuck ups. Are you sure not one of you could make the decision to label an obviously op-ed piece as so and then have the sack to sign your (….y’all?) name to it? I’m assuming some of you did get journalism degrees because it’s quite clear that chemistry, biology and medicine aren’t in the cards, apparently, for any of you. Only Ann Ramono gets a free dress day from the “Whole Team Mercury” bullshit, because she makes me laugh and has ovaries bigger than balls. The rest of you, sack the fuck up. If you’re going to write something, put your name on it like a big boy. Beyond that, there’s a tremendous amount of reading for you (…y’all? exactly how many are there of you?) to do on this subject.
This Mercury “article” acknowledges that pro-fluoride tried/is trying to rig the vote, but then endorses it anyway? Why would they need to rig the vote if their information is true and valid? And why is there an ad for “premium whole house fluoride water filter” at the bottom of this page…oh yes because nobody wants to drink this stuff. Fluoridation and covering the reservoirs, letting Nestle build a bottling plants (which they’ll succeed in doing if this passes because demand for bottled water will spike), is all leading to the eventual privatization of our water. Go ahead and add coal trains too to add to our toxic load. I sure wish somebody at the Mercury could crawl out of the old paradigm and into the new – drinking fluoridating water really doesn’t do much for oral health, it all goes straight down the drain and into the environment with no effect on anybody – just a legal way around pollution laws. It will be a such a sad mistake if it happens.
Fluoridated water does not prevent cavities. Clean water does not cause them. Water is not the problem. Well meaning people are mistakenly trying to treat the symptom, not the disease.
Let’s face it. All the people voting for it, are the same people who vote YES on everything anyway.
Something in the water in Portland, indeed.
Perhaps The Portland Mercury should stick with the smarmy, self-indulgent pieces they endlessly churn out, instead of propaganda pieces that appear to be spoon fed to them by the pro-fluoride propaganda machines. Municipalities across the country are re-thinking their water fluoridation policies due to health and environmental concerns. Maybe try doing some actual *gasp* research…
This has to be the worst most poorly written article i have ever read. I am an anti-flouridation advocate and not a single one of those arguments i would use to say that flouridation is wrong. You’re arguing against false statements to begin-with and trying to belittle the opposing side with your SAT worded comedy. known fact 1. Nazi’s were the first to test flouride on humans to see if it would make them more docile because it is the only known mineral known to calcify the pineal gland in your brain known for your sense of awareness. known fact 2. Flouride is a poison, no animal on earth survives after eating enough of it, and it has even been known to melt holes through concrete. fact 3, In the long run flouride has also been known to do more damage than benefit the teeth.
“In the NRC 2006 report, Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards, the National Research Council (NRC) reported that “several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride on thyroid function.”
Specifically, the report discussed research showing that:
“fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations” with “similar effects on T4 and T3…reported in experimental animals.”
In addition, the NRC discussed research linking fluoride to impacts on parathyroid activity, impairment of glucose tolerance, and possibly the timing of sexual maturity.
In light of these findings, the NRC panel recommended that the “effects of fluoride on various aspects of endocrine function should be examined further, particularly with respect to a possible role in the development of several diseases or mental states in the United States”
(1.). Despite this, proponents of fluoridation continue to ignore the scientific literature concerning the detrimental effects that fluoride has on the endocrine system.” – Mary Shomon, The Daily Activity Every Middle Aged Woman Should Beware of (Aug, 2011).
As far as the cancer risk goes: http://youtu.be/ClqK7XvfLg0 .
Heart risk research from 2012: http://journals.lww.com/nuclearmedicinecom…
Toxicity:
Akiniwa, Kenji, Re-Examination of acute toxicity of fluoride, Fluoride, 1997, 30:2, 89-104
“The acute toxic dose of fluoride has been believed to be 2 to 5 mg or 8 mg/kg of body weight. However, acute fluoride poisonings have occurred at doses of 0.1 to 0.8 mgF/kg of body weight in the USA. In Japan, a school-based anticariogenic program is being carried out with fluoride mouth rinses containing 500 to 2000 ppm sodium fluoride on approximately 158,000 persons, consisting mainly of elementary and junior high school children. Thus the safety problem of this treatment attracts much attention. Fluoride retention is said to be around 15 to 30% in fluoride mouth rinsing. In this paper, on the basis of toxic doses estimated in outbreaks of fluoride poisoning, the potential for acute poisoning by fluoride ingested during mouth rinsing is assessed. Acute fluoride poisoning is shown to be caused by exposure to lower doses of fluoride than commonly suggested. The toxic dose of fluoride should therefore be re-examined.”
Science!
1. National Research Council. 2006. Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. National Academies Press: Washington, DC.
2.Toxicol Ind Health. 2009 Feb;25(1):49-57. doi: 10.1177/0748233709102720.
Fluoride-induced thyroid dysfunction in rats: roles of dietary protein and calcium level.
Wang H, Yang Z, Zhou B, Gao H, Yan X, Wang J.
Source
Shanxi Key Laboratory of Ecological Animal Science and Environmental Medicine, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu, Shanxi, 030801, People’s Republic of China.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19318504?dopt=Abstract
3.Nuclear Medicine Communications:
January 2012 – Volume 33 – Issue 1 – p 14–20
doi: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834c187e
Original Articles
Association of vascular fluoride uptake with vascular calcification and coronary artery disease
Li, Yuxina; Berenji, Gholam R.a; Shaba, Wisam F.a; Tafti, Bashira; Yevdayev, Ellaa; Dadparvar, Siminb
4. Mary Shomon’s quoted text, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles…
5. Akiniwa, Kenji, Re-Examination of acute toxicity of fluoride, Fluoride, 1997, 30:2, 89-104
http://fluoride-class-action.com/wp-conten…
You’re absolutely right Christopher, anyone who doesn’t agree with us about how harmful water is to children must be an agent provacateur! Great thing to point out, because that makes us sound even more sane! But not too much because that would be deadly.
And Spindles, you’re so right why do we even need libraries? Seems like an old fashioned boondoggle – all that expense and no financial benefit at all. And if there’s no financial benefit, why have them around? Besides, poor kids can always get books from our exemplary, always well finaanced public school system.
I’d also love to hear your continued thoughts on the horrors of vaccinations and the EXTREME RISK they pose to children! It’s just like water – toxic to the core!
Maxim – Water is DEADLY! You’re obviously a paid commentator from the commercial water industry trying to poison our minds!
My aunt’s cousin’s husband had a disease and drinking water seemed to make it GET WORSE! Don’t inflict this trauma onto our children. Think of their cute children faces, forced to drink something unpure like water when they could have milk or juice that at natural and have actual benefits!
Kids already get milk and juice at schools but nobody is talking about this. Communities everywhere are rethinking their water programs. End the scourge of public water NOW!
It’s well known that the NAZIS forced public water and carried water supplies into battle. That’s a FACT.
100% of people who drink water will die, sometimes quickly and sometimes slowly. It can take years of agonizing torture before you’re dead but it impacts 100% of us! If that statistic doesn’t scare you, you’re obviously a paid shill for Aquafina and Dasani just trying to protect their profits. The government gives them this poison at no profit for the citizens! They’re just trying to protect their giant public subsidy! End public water now!
With Portland’s high suicide rate, we should be adding anti-depressants to our water.
Ever since that disgruntled ex Mercury employee got hired by City Hall, the City has made the Mercury it’s bitch.
Seems the pro side’s responses to the anti’s are always to ridicule, but strangely, almost never rebutt. I think that shows more than anything how both sides make up their mind. They seem to always think the anti side are conspiracy theorists. Whereas the anti side actually seems to understand the arguments on both sides. Labeling as fringe and ridiculing is the lazy way out of having to actually rebutt arguments. For instance, why is an increase in lead levels of children, found in this study in the journal Neurotoxicology, not something I should give a **** about? Can a pro side comment without riducule and with a decent argument? I would honestly love to see it happen.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005…
Screw you, Mercury. Playing the bad guy as a desperate ploy for more readers. Problem is, you might actually influence some otherwise intelligent people to vote the wrong way on this issue, and that is truly some shitty journalism.
I wear proof of the negative effects of fluoride on my teeth: obvious and distinctive discoloring left by the fluoride pills I was given by my teachers in elementary school. But that’s the least of it. You’ve failed to address ANY of the key concerns Portlanders have about fluoridation. How about the fact that the ADA and CDC agree that parents should not use fluoridated water to mix infant formula (so thanks for adding the cost of bottled water to their grocery bill, jerks)? How about the fact that ONE 8 ounce glass of water contains your daily intake of fluoride, and that most adults should be drinking at least 70 ounces of water a day? Or that the maximum amount of fluoride that salmon can stand in our fresh water is .2ppm, and our new fluoridation system will be pumping 1 ppm of fluoride into our rivers and streams? In addition, our pets, of all sizes, drink far more water than we humans do, and are therefore at a greater risk of overexposure to fluoride. Let’s not ignore the fact that in the first three months of this year alone 40 cities have rejected or removed fluoridation. Why pay for such expensive infrastructure when our city is so divided? If this measure passes, it will quickly be overturned, and we’ll be left with the bill. Better to invest in something like mobile dental stations, that could travel through low-income neighborhoods, passing out fluoride rinse, floss, brushes and paste. That might actually (gasp!) make a real difference.
I love all you smart, thinking Portlanders!!!!!! Just say no to Fluoride!!! You totally made my day!!! (I’m not being sarcastic) Love, 35 year old thyroid cancer mommy who wants to live to see her baby grow up!!!!!! Bless each and every one of you!!!
All the people that are voting no on this; hate children and poor people. It’s just that obvious. Shame on you people; please go kill yourselves.
I am a poor person and actually love my kids…
I really do WISH this whole thing was about addressing issues that really do keep low-income families like my own from getting the care we actually need; I really do wish this whole things was about addressing the issues that create financial strain and health struggles; I really do wish this was about taking positive steps in addressing the root of the problems we are all faced with. I really do wish this was about creating a place that supports all of Portland families… not just this idea about “teeth”, but our health as individuals and as a community.
I am angry that it is the families, that make up the foundation of Portland, that are the excuses for self interested companies to make $. It isn’t as cut and dry as the “make portland smile” signs make it out to be.
Don’t be fooled by the misleading blanket statements about teeth. Don’t be afraid of them calling us all conspiracy theorists- its embarrassing that this has become the defense.
I grew up in a place with fluoridated water and my teeth are blotchy because of it… (aka Fluorosis:over exposure to Fluoride) and although my teeth are pretty healthy (minus the embarrassing blotchy spots on my front teeth) my brother’s teeth are full of cavities and problems. Don’t fix something that isn’t broken—– our drinking water. …. work on fixing the root of the problems…. if you really give a damn.
I admit at first glance the argument FOR is attractive (who doesn’t want to help low-income families and kids), but the issues at hand run far deeper than a simple fix. Time and time again we have seen that it actually isn’t a fix at all.
IF it’s too easy and too good to be true, IT is.
Please educate yourself and look further into this issue before voting.
All the people that are voting yes on this; hate children, poor people, the environment, salmon, and are completely ethically bankrupt. It’s just that obvious. Shame on you people; please go eat an entire tube of fluoridated toothpaste.
@Tiffany Rooprai I wonder if the people who bitch and moan about other people concerned about dumping fertilizer leftovers in our water get their condescending views from wearing Patagonia and Northface clothing. #seehowyourdipshitlogicworks?
You’re absolutely right Homer – I hate how the discourse on public water is so negative and sarcastic when we are talking about POISON. People look at me like I’m crazy, but there’s not a single study out there that shows that water is 100% safe. People die from drinking it all the time. It doesn’t have a warning label, so how do you know when drinking it you’ve had too much?
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson both drank water and now they’re dead – what further proof does anyone need?
And we all know that Portland’s bubblers are really poison delivery machines designed by the elite to kill off the underclasses, especially kids!
I’m glad we can stand together on this Homer and expose the lies of the profit-making bottled water companies. It’s time to retire the bubblers that bubble out death – end the scourge of public water!
Spindles – you’re so funny, but why didn’t you mock the commenter by telling them to get vaccinated? Isn’t that roughly the same thing? Bit it’s okay, you’re still witty. You could’ve also told him to go downtown and drink from a bubbler! I guarantee that commenter will be dead one day as long as they drink water. It’s a FACT that water drinkers die!
I’m so glad we can stand together on the important topics of public water along with the evils of vaccination. All of society is one giant conspiracy – anyone who has any profit motive is obviously trying to kill us somehow.
Both the government and a large majority of the scientific community your the benefits of public water, but this is just a smokescreen for their REAL agenda – to kill us all! Like global warning or vaccinations, as long as there’s a scientist somewhere who disagrees, you know everyone else is in collusion in a giant conspiracy together. I have studies to prove it and the Internet gives me all the positive reinforcement I need in order to speak the TRUTH about the horrors of drinking water.
Why won’t you tell people what fluoride is? Where it comes from? How it’s made? How much lobby money did you receive to publish this crap?
Pridge Wessea: You completely proved my point – your posts are 100% mocking, 0% substance.
@Homer – Why are you mocking me? I’m 100% serious about this serious threat to our neighborhoods, family, and children. Why are you trying to silence me? Are you a paid shill for the commercial water/POISON industry? Or part of the government that’s working in collusion with it against it’s citizens? All they care about is profit… maybe you’re the same?
Water has NO WARNING LABELS. There’s no way to know just how much will kill you! Show me a study that PROVES that water is 100% safe, that nobody has died from drinking water, and prove to the rest of us that you’re more than just a money-grubbing paid commenter trying to spread FUD about this menace to our communities.
At the risk of sounding white trash, I just have to say FUCK YOU, YOU IDIOT MERCURY STAFF!!! I have read your rag for years and enjoyed your silly, crunky viewpoints. I am appalled and shocked at this sorry excuse for ‘unbiased reporting’ replaced with abject laziness. You’ve broken the first rule of writing: stick with what you know. Your reporting shines when you focus on hipster drivel. Apparently, I have a soft spot in my heart for that stuff? Who knew. Go fuck yourselves and your sad, “dizzying” search for truth. Oh, and stop being so fucking lazy and teach your kids to brush their fucking teeth. Assholes.
Pridge Wessea: Or perhaps fluoridating the water is simply a bad idea with some bad consequences – no conspiracy required.
WELL WELL WELL WHO’S BEING PAID OFF NOW? FUCKERS!!
http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-30139-d…
That’s the third-largest single donation to the anti-fluoride campaign, and brings Mercola’s total donations to $26,975, including in-kind contributions of polling and a YouTube video.
Mercola runs Dr. Mercola’s Natural Health Center in Hoffman Estates, Ill.—a hugely popular health products company and that directly markets items including fluoride-free toothpaste and water filtration systems to remove fluoride from kitchen taps.
Yeah tcraigherny, who’s being paid off now? http://swoolley.org/files/cleanwater-vs-fl…
And that was over $143,000 paid by Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland in bribes … I mean “special grants” to minority groups for their support.
Weird. I think the sanest argument against fluoridation of water is probably the one from this study among others on the National Institute of Health site that cites the links between fluoride exposure and lowered intelligence in children.
This study indicates that exposure to fluoride is associated with reduced intelligence in children. We have found a significant inverse relationship between intelligence and the water fluoride level, and intelligence and the urinary fluoride level….
It is very well established that fluoride can penetrate the blood brain barrier.[6–9,11,28] Also, it can pass through the placenta to the fetus,[6–9,11,29] and with subsequent continuous exposure to fluoride during childhood, it may have adverse effects on the developing brain, thereby causing decreased intelligence in children.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
Or the argument that it’s unethical to medicate people against their will.
For a software engineer he sure is shit at spreadsheets.
Seth Woolley: Software Engineer, Election Activist <--- great source.
rainfade…. we know. Because you’ve posted your opinions a gazillion times in this thread under various names.
Communities that have rejected fluoridation since 1990: List: http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/commu… From the very start, water fluoridation has always been an unpopular program. In its 60+ year history, the majority of U.S. communities that have had an opportunity to vote on the measure have rejected it. Fluoridation was thus established in the U.S. not through public referenda, but executive actions by government bodies. For a brief history on public opposition to fluoridation in the U.S., click here: http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/fluor…
Most developed nations, including the vast majority of western Europe, do not fluoridate their drinking water. Cities that do not fluoridate their water include: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Basel, Berlin, Copenhagen, Florence, Frankfurt, Geneva, Glasgow, Helsinki, London, Montreal, Oslo, Paris, Rome, Stockholm, Tokyo, Vancouver, Venice, Vienna, and Zurich.
Since health authorities in North America have refused to let go of the fluoridation paradigm, local communities are doing the work for them. Since 2010, over 70 communities have rejected the practice, including over 30 communities like Calgary, Alberta (pop. 1.3 million people) and Albuquerque, New Mexico (pop. 500,000) that have voted to end their longstanding fluoridation programs.
Communities that have rejected fluoridation since 2010:
List: http://www.fluoridealert.org/content/commu…
@ tcraighenry, It’s data compiled directly of the Oregon Secretary of State’s website, you imbecile.
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?
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.
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.
So link to that instead of your (?) Crappy YouTube video.
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.
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
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…
Well written, well researched. CWP: the truth hurts, doesn’t it?
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.
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
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
The 2010 Water Quality Report, also showing zero arsenic, is here – http://tinyurl.com/c4jcmce
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.
@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.
Wow Pridge Wesse, digging deep for that one. That’s not totally creepy at all. And you’re right, vaccines are better than mothers milk, they’re all created equal, and there’s never any profiteering …
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/22/…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-…
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,…
http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/2009…
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=new…
http://het.sagepub.com/content/31/10/1012.…
http://tribune.com.pk/story/293191/vaccine…
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/03/…
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32418446/ns/heal…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
http://naturalsociety.com/3-girls-dead-oth…
http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/index…
“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?
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).
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.
@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.
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.
Of all the straw men to pick on, the Mercury picked a good one. Yes, part of the fluoridation debate is about how much crock and pseudo-science each side can chuck out. Ok, another element is how all that bullshit snowballs and some wingnuts get tossed in. The anti-fluoridation side seems to be chock full of irrational arguments and morons.
The little part of the brain that your straw man is missing is the one great, big, whopping, and important argument that medication without consent is unethical.
rainfade: your cognitive dissonance is astounding.
August.g, to an authoritarian, left or right, ethical arguments are immaterial.
Cut back on the hyperbole for two seconds and maybe, just maybe, you won’t sound like a loon
Re’ the Harvard study (which I have actually READ, thank you very much, and so know that the pro-fluoride team is LYING when they claim that the anti-fluoride team is LYING about its findings) a few quotes from the AUTHORS might clear things up…
“Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and OTHER POISONS (emphasis mine) that cause brain drain.” Philippe Grandjean, senior author, noting that fluoride is a known neurotoxin which readily crosses the placenta, potentially placing developing brains at significant risk.
Indeed, fluoride falls between lead and arsenic on the federal government’s own toxicity tables.
And the union representing scientists at the EPA has, for years, included among their demands that they be provided fluoride-free water at work. These are the folks who have READ, WRITTEN and UNDERSTAND the studies, folks! They don’t want to drink the shit!
The Harvard study itself, even though examining mostly data from high fluoride areas, DID conclude an average IQ decline of 7 points for children in fluoridated areas, and specifically noted that this effect was found even in populations exposed to “optimal” levels, though to a lesser but still concerning extent.
In a statement issued 3 months after the initial release of the study, the authors, under fire for reviewing mostly studies of high-fluoride areas of China (they lamented the paucity of U.S. studies to anaylize) stated:
“These results do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S.
ON THE OTHER HAND (emphasis mine), neither can it be concluded that no
risk is present. We therefore recommend further research to clarify
what role fluoride exposure levels may play in possible
adverse effects on brain development, so that future risk assessments can properly take into regard this possible hazard.”
The overall gist of the study (and I DO know how to interpret these things…finishing up my 2nd degree at the moment and have done extensive research in medical/scientific journals both for school and work) is that there IS a significant IQ lowering effect from fluoride exposure, even at lower levels (though of course more pronounced at higher exposures, as with ANY poison/neurotoxin) and that much more research should be done on the effects on human fetuses/infants/children (as opposed to the numerous animal studies which support significant harm to the developing brain from even moderate exposure levels).
I do not appreciate being lied to and manipulated, as I have been by the pro-fluoride dogs in this fight, who parrot all the same tired, distorted sound-bites as predicatably as any fringe internet conspiracy site. Have you READ your voter’s pamplet yet? UGGHH! (though it DOES, interestingly, contain an argument in opposition from one of the authors of a study the pro-fluoride team has repeatedly mischaracterized…but I guess she doesn’t really understand what the study she co-authored MEANS;)
Even less do I appreciate being condescended to (esp. by the local weekly rag’s news team and celebrity gossip columnist…Ann, I love you, but you are testing my loyalty!).
I resent the hell out of the way this matter has been bullied through without the usual citizen input or review period (gee, wonder WHY the pending report on the DECLINING rate of cavities among Portland children is not being released until after the vote? or WHY there has been virtually no formal review of the scientific and medical literature surrounding the issue? WHY is it being rushed to a vote under the threat that the city will go ahead and approve millions in spending for it regardless?)
I’ll be voting a big fat HELL NO on this one! As will my 21 year old son (who has excellent teeth “despite” being born and raised in Portland with no fluoride in his water OR toothpaste OR in any other intentionally administered form.)
Same for his 13 year old sister, but she’s too young to vote.
And BTW, both have qualified for (and GOTTEN) FREE dental care through OHP from birth through age 18. Like ALL lower-income kids in Portland. Spare me the “poor kids” shit.
P.S. I earned my 1st degree in Child Development and spent 20 years working with young children, both here in Portland and elsewhere, most of them lower-income.
I NEVER saw (or have seen since) the sort of rampant, ER-requiring dental decay so emotionally described by the pro-fluoridation camp.
The only case of anything like that I ever saw was in my nephew from a heavily fluoridated area of Texas (now a 23 year old Marine) who was allowed to suck on a bottle full of apple juice (re-consitituted with fluoridated tap water) until the age of 4. His front teeth rotted down to the gum and he required extensive treatment to remove them and install a bridge so his adult teeth would come in properly.
I’m sure such cases do occur, but it is NOT due to lack of fluoride in the water. It is due to poor nutrition, poor dental care habits, and lack of access/utilization of routine dental care (which again, is FREE to all lower-income children in Portland!)
The idea seems to be that we can’t trust poor parents (or ANY parents) to be responsible and ensure their kids do what REALLY prevents decay…so we should medicate everyone en mass with a known neurotoxin. Sweet.
Random caps and calling people folks always brings me around! Also what is scientific disagreement.
@Raven333 – Cool story bro.
And attacks on the opponent’s choice of words (“folks”, “people”) and/or EMPHASIS, neither of which have any bearing whatsoever on the argument at hand, always tend to sway me over to the other side. 😉
You know, about 15 years ago I spent several months researching fluoride/fluoridation in medical and scientific journals as part of a larger project. THAT is what formed my opinion on the subject. I’ve been interested in and following the topic ever since (and drinking fluoride-free water whenever I travel or live somewhere which fluoridates).
And why I’m so pissed about the misrepresentation of some recent landmark studies on the part of the pro-fluoridation forces. There has been some bad science on both sides, but by FAR, the worst has come from the pro-fluoridation FOLKS (oh no she DIDN’T!!! Using “folks” AND BOLDING at the same time! She MUST be a nut-job;)
One thing I’ve found very interesting is that there is very little “scientific disagreement” with the “fluoride GOOOOD” position among entities like the CDC or the ADA or among rank and file dentists (they tend to parrot the party line, using the same carefully worded and distorting sound-bites).
But if one actually READS the literature, examines the decades of studies and the reviews of them published in peer-reviewed journals since, or even delves deeper and looks at the raw data and design of some of the studies used to defend fluoridation (all of which I have done) one begins to see a clear pattern of research scientists (you know, like those at the EPA who demand in their contracts that they be provided with fluoride-free water?) who generally concur that:
*Fluoride is a poison; a known neurotoxin, which readily crosses the placenta/blood-brain barrier, and very close on the same toxicity continuum as lead and mercury.
*Fluoridation, even at “optimum levels”, carries significant health risks to the population in general but especially to certain segments of the population (i.e. fetuses, infants, children, the elderly, and those with particular medical conditions).
*Ingested fluoride carries minimal to no dental benefits; only TOPICAL application has been shown to have any significant merit, an admission the ADA has finally made, though they still cling to the disproven rationalization that the trace levels in saliva from ingestion confer any significant benefit.
*Fluoride added to chlorinated drinking water (which ours is) significantly increases the bio-availablity of both lead and arsenic. Both of which are also present in varying amounts in most water supplies.
*Much more research on humans is needed given both the strong indications of potential and actual harm in both humans and non-human animals and the relative paucity of decent, recent data (see, the thing is, when you just conclude a thing is the greatest thing since sliced bread, you don’t tend to fund or otherwise bother to conduct much research on it. That poses a problem to scientists trying to evaluate the actual risks and benefits. Same way the Reagan/Bush era de-funding of research on cannabis, which they had de facto decided was BAD, set research on the benefits and risks of that substance back decades. But it IS very handy to be able to say “there are no definitive studies proving such and such.” Well no FUCK! Studies have to be DONE to produce results, definitive or otherwise).
I guess we will have to just agree to disagree on this one. 🙂
Also – Did you know that WATER is POISON? Let’s review the FACTS about the HORRORS of water:
1) Everyone (100%) of the people who’ve consumed water have died. It killed some of them quickly and some of them slowly, but in the end, everyone is dead. TRUTH. George Washington is dead today and we obviously have water to blame for it.
2) Water has no nutrients – if we have to drink it, we should at least have plants or animals filter it for us via juice or milk. Kids can get both in their schools.
3) There is not a single independently verifiable study done that shows water is 100% safe.
4) My aunt’s cousin’s husband had a disease and drinking water seemed to make it GET WORSE!
5) Public water is the most insidious of all. It’s a giant subsidy to Coke and Pepsi who make Aquafina and Dasani, which is just filtered public water. They like public water because they make millions from it and it’s impossible to trust anyone with a profit motive. Besides, if the city doesn’t make a profit from it, why should we even have it?
6) Public water comes with NO WARNING LABELS. There’s no way to know exactly how much is too much before it strikes you down. I know we all remember this:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/16614865/ns/us_n…
7) Public water is governed by regulations, and is pumped full of known toxins like chlorine. Obviously it’s a conspiracy by the government and the chlorine industry to not only kill you, me, and all of our children but also protect their profits. Even if we’re dead, they know the public water will flow.
8) Portland’s bubblers are really poison delivery machines designed by the elite to kill off the underclasses and especially their kids!
9) The Nazis carried water supplies into battle. HITLER BATHED IN IT.
Remember: If anyone disagrees with you or complains about your methods or your studies or tries to keep you from speaking the TRUTH, they are obviously paid shills in collusion with government/corporations/corporate government who spend their entire time getting paid TRYING TO DESTROY THE FACTS. And of course they’re going to insist that they’re not, they’ll say anything to DENY THE TRUTH!
You now know the FACTS about the poison that is water and the corrupt corporate subsidy to coke and pepsi and the chlorine industry through the public water complex. The facts are obvious and verifiable. Don’t let anyone convince you differently. SPEAK THE TRUTH!
I really wish this article ended with, “That’s the tooth.”
Oh no, don’t get me wrong. You being a nut job has nothing to do with the RANDOM emphasis or FOLKS.
Also brevity etc
Forgive me if this is an issue I feel very strongly about…I don’t consider BREVITY a plus when we are debating something as significant as this. Apparently the city council do, since they have conspired with the pro-fluoridation camp to by-pass the usual procedures for review and citizen input.
And BTW, my use of emphasis is not “random”…it is very intentional.
So yeah, dismiss me as a “nut-job”. You are the oh-so politically correct, knee-jerk liberal who swallows what they are fed by the “reputable” sources hook, line, and sinker. I have friends like you. I don’t hate you but I do sort of pity you.
Me, I’m probably further to the left and more progressive than you, have more of a concern for kids (esp. lower-income ones) than you (both as a former teacher of them and a parent), am graduating in the fall with my 2nd degree (top 10% of my class), and NEVER simply accept anything at face value without doing my own research to confirm or debunk.
To quote Tarentino, “You don’t know me. You only THINK you do” (emphasis his).
Ridicule is one of the most powerful tools of dolts determined to preserve the status quo, often due to their own professional, financial , or personal/ego interests.
The man who discovered that simple hand-washing between autopsies and the delivery of children (Ignaz Semmelweis) was drummed out of the profession as a loon/nut-job and died penniless in an asylum. But he was RIGHT.
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
—
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)
He was right, too.
Last I heard, debate requires two willing opponents. And if there aren’t any, then you’re just really arguing with yourself.
edit: “The man who discovered that simple hand-washing between autopsies and the delivery of children (Ignaz Semmelweis)…would prevent the so-called child-bed fever which killed scores of women delivering in hospitals….was drummed out of the profession as a loon/nut-job and died penniless in an asylum. But he was RIGHT.”
It’s a shame he had no evidence and germ theory was only proven after his death I guess.
“‘All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.’
—
Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 – 1860)
He was right, too.”
So, Raven — since the benefits of water fluoridation is what is being “violently opposed” here, what you’re saying is…
National Academy of Sciences acknowledges that fluoride in drinking water makes children less intelligent.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=…
Read if you are able.
Fluoridation measures have been voted down three times already: let the citizens of Portland choose how and if to fluoridate their own water, rather than getting an imprecise dose through drinking water.
The Department of Health and Human Services has recently lowered the recommended dosage of fluoride because there is greater access to fluoride in the form of toothpastes, and mouth rinses for examples. http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/…
Your paper blows… totally blows!
Can anyone tell me how the levels in the study in China compare to ours? I am confuse about translating that because they didn’t measure in ppm. Help.
Also, both towns had fluoridated water. So
I guess I can read or whatever.
blownspeakers: I would say water fluoridation has been mainstream for quite a while. It is those opposed to water fluoridation that are being ridiculed. I don’t think it’s at the point where the pro side is violently opposing them – yet. Once Portland says no, other parts of the country will also. That’s when the establishment will get serious about their violent opposition. Then, many years from now, water fluoridation will seem a quaint, if shocking, part of our history. Europe’s ahead of us, as usual.
the Harvard Link is here, on the Harvard Website.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/
Really the studies were done in china, harvard reviewed the study
The researchers conducted a systematic review of studies, almost all of which are from China where risks from fluoride are well-established. Fluoride is a naturally occurring substance in groundwater, and exposures to the chemical are increased in some parts of China. Virtually no human studies in this field have been conducted in the U.S., said lead author Anna Choi, research scientist in the Department of Environmental Health at HSPH.
So yes and know. Given there is reasonable concern for harm, there is no eithical argurment for this violation of the most basic of human rights. The right to medical self determination.
Nazi doctors were executed for their human experiments without consent.
Do we need a Nuremberg trial for the ADA, the same people who tell us that mercury in the mouth is stable and safe, despite rational science pointing out it is toxic going into the mouth, and toxic coming out of the mouth.
In lawsuit against the ADA the ADA rightly pointed out they are NOT a public health organization.
Basically they can say whatever they want. They are an association that endorses products and policy and makes a good dollar doing it.
The ADA states that their endorsements are totally bullshit.
Dissemination of information relating to the practice of dentistry does not create a duty of care to protect the public from potential injury
The ADA owes no legal duty of care to protect the public from allegedly dangerous products used by dentists. The ADA did not manufacture, design, supply or install the mercury-containing amalgams. The ADA does not control those who do. The ADA’s only alleged involvement in the product was to provide information regarding its use. Dissemination of information relating to the practice of dentistry does not create a duty of care to protect the public from potential injury
F u, mercury news team!
@tcraighenry: 1mg/L is approximately 1ppm. – http://www.rapidtables.com/convert/chemist…
The difference between (avg) .36 ppm and (avg) 2.47 ppm was a shocking 8 IQ points lower, and way more kids under 70 IQ. Can we please just stick to toothpaste and stop messing around with the idea of adulterating our water with this dangerous substance?
I love the argument that, “it’s an element”. Lithium is a similarly sized element, that also passes the blood-brain barrier and also has significant stupefying effects on the brain. Want some in your water?
Read the full report. There’s not enough data for the scientists to draw conclusions about a safe level.
If it’s a linear relationship between fluoride exposure and IQ (nobody’s got enough data to say that it is or isn’t), then the HKHS proposal is going to sacrifice about 2.5 IQ points from my cute little bug and everyone else’s. (And maybe all of us adults too.)
Is it a linear relationship? Is .7 ppm a safe level for brain development? Are Mercury staff taking fluoride colonics?
More study is needed.
It’s most likely that my posting here is poorly timed and I’m sure there are people who will get offended at whatever I have to say (This is after all, the internet).
Firstly, I’d like to address poisoning of salmon. Overtly high levels of fluoride can do away with a salmon population because raised levels of fluoride can kill the fish. Here’s the problem with that argument against fluoridated water: the fluoride doesn’t go in the river itself.
In fact, the Mercury News Team assertion about the purifying processes of water (involving lye which is not as the authors said “toxic” but just highly basic to the point of being dangerous to touch, ammonia which if not removed from water can cause serious respiratory problems and chlorine, which is in fact toxic if not removed after the process) are true. And these are necessary! Without this, there’s a very likely chance that nature will show you who’s boss, delivering a water-born virus or bacteria straight to your body.
So what’s my point? These chemicals would harm plenty of natural organisms if they were added in the source. But fluoride instead would be added in the same chemical plants that purify the water that leads to your faucets. Rather than going into the ecosystem that nourishes salmon, fluoride goes instead into your faucets at home. So if you wanted to kill salmon, then I guess you could turn your faucet on into a nearby fresh-water stream, though you’d have to pump an exorbitantly expensive quantity of water from your pipes.
The second argument, one that as a fan of not having the government impinge on rights seems contrary to that opinion, is the idea of “FORCED” fluoridation. What this argument consistently leaves out is that this is a measure is one chosen by the people. You can complain about the government’s secret plans in your tin-foil hat, but it wouldn’t change the fact that people ultimately decide their own fate in this scenario. So the government isn’t FORCING fluoride onto you, your neighbors would be.
Which brings me to the third point. I don’t live in Portland, which may bring some flack this way. In fact, I live in New Orleans (which is actually known for its notoriously corrupt governmental facilities which happens to include its rundown water-treatment plant) and before that I lived in San Diego. Both of these places fluoridate water and rates of bone cancer and mental retardation are no higher than in non-fluoridated Europe. What is better is the rate of tooth decay (severely decreased).
Moreso, the poisonous effects of fluoride are only from studies with high quantities. In fact, that’s how lab studies mostly work. I have worked in a research lab for a few years now, and I can tell you that the majority of research uses unrealistic levels of chemicals to prove a point. This argument was lost on some of the commenters on this article. .7 ppm is not much more than you’re already getting from your toothpaste. And your fluoridated mouthwash (if you’re into the whole anticavity thing). It’s a supplement to help your teeth.
So that’s most of my argument. I’m not a Portland native, so maybe I am not so strongly against the typical fluoridation of water like most of the United States, but I think the health benefits outweigh the “correlations” in studies that people site.
Best of luck on your decision Portland.
Putting fluoride in water and leaving it up to the public =/= nazis.
Anyway, so was the fluoride put into the water in China manufactured for improving public health or was it industrial waste run off?
@rainfade Lithium’s long been a treatment for various brain disorders. Another element with a public health use.
Though your complaining that lithium is “stupefying” is pretty telling. Are you one of those people that believe all medz are a ploy of The Man?
No, I don’t believe all meds are a ploy of “the man”. I do happen to notice though that profit motive and public health aren’t always in concert, and that people wearing lab coats aren’t always telling the truth, often because people looking to make $$ have misinformed them. (Look up Vioxx for a recent super-lethal example.)
But, even though lithium is good for some brain disorders doesn’t mean you put it in the water for everyone at uncontrolled doses. Still, lithium can cause cognitive problems (hence: stupefying).
I’m not sure, but I believe the fluoride in those Chinese studies was naturally present.
The Indian study I linked earlier in the thread was I believe also from high naturally present fluoride.
nih.gov has a whole bunch of studies linking fluoride exposure to lower intelligence. I just posted one.
This is apples to oranges. Lithium is a drug used for relatively rare disorders (that’s been proven over what, 60 years of use?) While fluoride is used for people who have teeth. Which is almost everyone.
You still didn’t answer the questions about the origins of the fluoride in China. Plus Harvard analyzing a different study to confirm the conclusions drawn by another organization doesn’t mean squat.
I think it’s funny you’re rambling on about how people in white lab coats lie while…. posting a whole bunch of links to thinks people in white lab coats say.
It’s simple: if you want fluoride in your water, buy fluoride supplements.
Yeah, let’s definitely not follow Europe’s lead in not having fluoride in the drinking water. What do they know? http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/20…
emstern1: This whole measure started out because a private lobbying group, Upstream Public Health, met covertly (http://blog.oregonlive.com/portlandcityhal…) with City Hall, to push a measure Portlanders have twice rejected. Portlanders had to actively fight to get this on the ballot rather than have it be enacted. The whole thing reeks of a complete subversion of the democratic process, not an example of it.
People always want the easy fix. Lets not exercise and eat right to lose weight, just give me a pill. How about we invest in dental hygiene/education vs treating and entire population that does not need nor want fluoride in their bodies nor discharged into their rivers.
The dosage question is also a major concern. Kids drink very little water. Athletes (many whom choose Portland as their training ground) drink large amounts. Lets avoid the ungreen solution of purchasing bottled water when we have clean tap water as a viable option.
You know “Europe” isn’t one big country right? It’s made up of a large number of countries…
Also am I missing something or is there no mention of fluoride in that article?
Here I will be helpful. Here are a list of countries that have fluoridated water.
Nigeria
South Africa
Hong Kong
Israel
Japan
South Korea
Malaysia
Singapore
Vietnam
France (naturally fluoridated) – European
Ireland – European
Spain – European
United Kingdom (natural and artificial) – European
Canada
United States
Australia
New Zealand
Brazil
Chile
Here are a list of countries that don’t (but did, or have high water pollution, naturally occuring fluoride in high doses:)
China
India
Czech Republic
Netherlands
Switzerland
Countries that support it but haven’t implemented it:
Denmark
Finland
The percentages range wildly because, like the US, many countries allow local municipalities to decide on whether or not they want to add fluoride. Additionally, countries like France that have naturally occurring fluoride in high concentrations in ground water don’t add it but also don’t remove it.
I repeat: Europe is not one big country. There are 4 European countries with fluoridated water and 2 that actively support it but haven’t/can’t implement it.
Do you really not get the point I was making? I’ll clarify, just in case you actually tried to understand the point I was making and didn’t: most of Europe does not add fluoride to their water (and no, naturally occurring is not adding, because silicofluorides ARE different than naturally occurring fluoride – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1742005…). As a group, admittedly heterogeneous, but still, they are light-years ahead of us in terms of outlawing practices/chemicals which are unhealthful or morally wrong. Looking where they are collectively (not all, but most) on this issue, given their positions on other issues, might be a good start to where actual progressives come down in this issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_…
I uh, you really need to be more specific when you’re talking about “Europe.” There are huge ranges in infrastructure, size, health models, and types of government. The UK, for example, is currently governed by the Conservatives who are far from progressive. And the supreme court of Ireland decided that fluoride was an ok thing to use.
Additionally, if you’re talking about the European Union specifically this is the same body that says feta cheese isn’t feta unless it comes from Greece.
Do they have better policies about some things? Sure. Do they have incredibly bizarre and fucked up policies about things? Absolutely!
The point is, you can use a single country as a model but using “Europe” is misleading and inaccurate.
(Hey we’re going to sell gold next week. Wait! The minute I said that the price plummeted? HOW BIZARRE)
You also know that lobbyists act on behalf of citizens as well as corporations? Much like PACs.
tcraighenry: When lobbyists serve as end-runs around the democratic process, I don’t care who they claim to be serving.
Lobbying is just a group of people acting on behalf of another group of people because the original people don’t have time to hang around Salem or wherever. They aren’t inherently evil.
@disastronaut: So, you don’t have any specific rebuttal to the article so you resort to poisoning the well? That’s so typical of anti-fluoriders. Grow up!
@brenna, fluoride isn’t a drug. Your argument is invalid. See point #2 in the article above.
1. They don’t really have anything. The reason China stopped putting fluoride in the water was because they couldn’t adequately control the dose they were providing alongside the pollution and run off in the water. Also China is really fucking big. They have to use steam powered trains to get across the country. But that’s the study they like to harp on.
2. They don’t refute the ADA or the CDC’s claims that fluoride in the water is a good thing.
3. Lobbyists and PACs aren’t inherently evil Mr. Burns style organizations trying to kill us with aluminum manufacturing bi-products.
4. Europe isn’t a singular entity. When pointed out that countries in Europe do have fluoridation, they got nothing.
@Paul Cone, chiropractors and acupuncturists *are*, for the most part, quacks.
“Lobbying is just a group of people acting on behalf of another group of people because the original people don’t have time to hang around Salem or wherever. “
Riiiiiiiiiiiight. Man, I have some great swamp land in Florida you might be interested in.
LobicSabre: Funny, the NIH seems to think fluoride is a drug – http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginf…
@Homer said: “LobicSabre: Funny, the NIH seems to think fluoride is a drug – http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginf…“
Funny because they never actually call it a drug on that page. Did you read it before you posted that link.
Further, why would you reference a page talking about medicinal fluoride when we’re talking about fluoride added to public drinking water? The two are similar things, but not the same. Nowhere in that page does it talk about fluoridated water. It talks about fluoridated dental products.
Your false equivalency makes your argument invalid.
Lobbyists:
Jessica Adomson lobbies for:
Northwest Career Colleges Federation
Oregon Public Broadcasting
Brielyn Atkins lobbies for:
Oregon Violence Against Women PAC
Christel Allen lobbies for:
American Lung Association of the Mountain Pacific
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation
Oregon Association of Naturopathic Physicians
Oregon Housing Authorities
James Anderson lobbies for:
American College of Emergency Physicians, Oregon Chapter
Jeff Anderson lobbies for:
United Food & Commercial Workers Local 555
Anyway, just a few names from our state.
http://www.oregon.gov/OGEC/Pages/forms_pub…
(I believe they have to register, so there’s your list.)
Prescription medication =/= drug. Would you call a topical cream a drug? Not to mention the word “drug” doesn’t really mean anything in a medical sense.
tcraighenry: Are you for real? druginfo/meds is in the url. The first section id “Why is this medication prescribed?” WTF? I was refuting the statement “fluoride is not a drug.” Which is a common, and intentional error, on the pro side. It is being used as a drug – the NIH agrees. I know the pro side hates it being called a drug, because then you can say it forced medication, and be entirely accurate. Still that pesky thing called the truth.
Errr, that last post should have been directed at LobicSabre.
A topical cream for something like acne is also a medication. Would you call that a drug?
I gotta ask at this point. Homer are you just trolling?
tcraighenry: ? Your ad hominem does not serve this discussion. Perhaps you should look in a mirror.
@Home said: “tcraighenry: Are you for real? druginfo/meds is in the url. The first section id ‘Why is this medication prescribed?’ WTF?”
Yup, WTF, indeed. Why, when it talks about products labeled as medications with fluoride in them, do you then call fluoride a drug. You’re making a leap that your link doesn’t support.
“I was refuting the statement “fluoride is not a drug.” Which is a common, and intentional error, on the pro side.”
No, you didn’t refute anything. Nowhere in that link is fluoride called a drug, which is what you’re claiming it is. The pro side isn’t making an error in pointing this out and you have yet to support your claim to the contrary. It seems the common and intentional error lies in your argument, not the argument on the pro side.
“It is being used as a drug – the NIH agrees.”
No, it is being used in products labeled as medications. It is *this* specific definition that NIH agrees with. They do *not* call it a drug, as you do.
“I know the pro side hates it being called a drug, because then you can say it forced medication, and be entirely accurate. Still that pesky thing called the truth.”
No, the pro side sees the ridiculous idea of calling a mineral a drug because it isn’t a drug. You need it to be falsely labeled a drug for your argument about “forced medication” to have any weight, which it does not.
Is adding iodine to salt forced medication, too? Do you even know why iodine was added to salt?
So, yes, about the pesky thing called truth. You don’t seem to be working with much of it on your side.
It’s a legitimate question given you won’t respond to a single refutation against your evidence.
Anyway. Let’s recap.
1. Europe isn’t a progressive hive mind
2. That Chinese study wasn’t in a controlled environment
3. Lobbyists aren’t inherently evil and neither are PACs. (Unless you consider lobbying for the Umatilla and emergency room doctors evil.)
4. Your definition of drug is bizarre and unfounded.
Since you haven’t refuted anything up there, I win!
http://thesaurus.com/browse/medication
You’ll find a word there that starts with d. Maybe thesaurus.com is in on the conspiracy as well!
Fluoride in the water is being used for EXACTLY the same purpose as that link.
More synonyms in that entry: healing, elixir, placebo, treatment
Fluoride is also an elixir, a placebo and a treatment by your logic.
I need to clarify what an ad hom attack is for you btw. It would have been an ad hominem if I would have said “well your opinions don’t matter because you’re a troll.” Asking if you’re participating in behavior that is like a troll is not an attack on your credibility. It’s a question about your intent.
“Fluoride is a toxic molecule that wreaks extensive, often irreversible, havoc on the body. The thyroid is particularly affected by fluoride exposure because its store of iodine is depleted. Iodine deficiency depresses the thyroid’s metabolic and immune functions, resulting in hypothyroidism and lowered immunity.
Unlike iodine, which the body cannot store long-term, fluoride is a problematic and persistent toxin. Its effects are systemic and only about half of what is ingested can be excreted; the rest is stored in bones and tissues, blocking access to other elements, like iodine.
Fluoride and iodine are both halogens. Fluoride, the negative ion of the element fluorine, easily displaces iodine in the body because it is much lighter and therefore more reactive.
Fluoride exposure can come from multiple obvious and not-so-obvious sources. In addition to dental hygiene products and drinking water, many breakfast cereals, juices from concentrate, soda and other processed foods contain alarming levels. Fluoride-containing pesticide use means that the environment is being flooded with fluoride by conventional agriculture (http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-pesticides.htm). Also, many antidepressants contain large amounts of fluoride and are widely prescribed, often for a lifetime of use.
Lack of iodine shuts down production of thyroxine, the thyroid prohormone that controls metabolism, and, in one way or another, impacts every aspect of health.
But the action of iodine in the thyroid is not limited to metabolism; it also has an important immune function. If the thyroid is deficient in iodine, a critical step in immunity will be reduced or eliminated.” Marianne Leigh
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031317_fluoride_iodine.html#ixzz2Sl8hN2US“
“natural news”
Jesus get a room you two! Also after having a bad day I want to thank the person who was upset at the Mercury for “publishing under the guise of journalism”. Holy fuck I needed that laugh. Also whoever pointed up that this publication’s strength was witless hipster self promotion was also correct and should win something along with the 500th commenter! Oh, and I am voting no in part due to the ethics of how this is being done, and concerns in terms of overall public health. But I encourage the trolling, my this is exciting. Oh, and Mercury, you blow and…eh whatever been said already and I am still stunned there are people shocked at this,lol
Find out the answers to the three questions asked by Howard Patterson, M.E.M. in the video below.
The Real Questions about Fluoridation.
#1. Does it work?
#2. Is it safe?
#3. Is it safe for the environment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYej_OgZHE
Fluoridation and the Environment (high resolution)
Howard Patterson, M.E.M./Flying Karamazov Brothers
Published on Apr 11, 2013
The actual science on fluoridation: its effect on salmon and the environment, efficacy for dental health, and safety for human consumption. Please watch before you vote!
There is a worldwide movement to stop forced Fluoridation of public water systems. It is successful in many communities.
My hope is that Fluoridation of public water systems will soon be a thing of the past!
===
Our water WILL NOT BE POISONED with toxic industrial waste, which is exactly what Fluorosilicic Acid is. Our water will not be contaminated. Get out of our water system with your drugs and industrial waste. Make your money elsewhere.
There are very likely grounds for a lawsuit if this measure passes, according to the Oregon State Bar.
See this page: http://www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin…
And please see this page. http://www.fluoride-class-action.com/for-a…
Please share with everyone freely. Thank you!
===
http://fluoridefreekansas.org/2012/11/vict…
Read what happened in Wichita! Victory against the MACHINE.
Adding Fluorosilicic Acid to our public water supply does nothing to address the many deep, systemic issues that have created uneven medical access and nutritional access/education/habits among poor communities. As long as the cheapest and most accessible food is processed, sugary, and nutrient deficient, and as long as our healthcare system is controlled by for-profit interests, health problems like dental caries in poor (mostly minority) communities will continue to manifest, no matter how many additional chemicals we put in the water or air.
I’m reminded of when I used to teach in high schools and saw kids show up daily with nothing but Twizzlers or other candy in their backpacks for breakfast. This is a problem fluoridation CAN’T solve.
What fluoridation DOES do, however, is increase the daily chemical load on our bodies and our ecosystem, proposing a new substance to consume and inject into our biosphere over the long term. Portland’s water already has three “sanitizing” agents in it. Is making it even more of a chemical soup really the wise thing to do in this day and age? With a planet and populace already ailing from the widespread and indiscriminate use of chemical agents, we might finally begin to question the wisdom of the “better living through chemistry” panacea, and we can instead begin to consider more sustainable, deeply curative approaches to fundamentally social issues of this type.
Water and air are basic to life, free and necessary to all. Is this not reason enough to protect their purity, and to find more acute solutions to acute problems such as the one fluoridation proposes to “solve?”
Oh look, an OHSU doctor was just caught red-handed stealing signs outside the headquarters of Clean Water Portland. The good doctor also works for the Oregon Health Authority, the state agency that was deliberately delaying the results of the new Oregon Smile Survey.
http://www.katu.com/politics/Man-caught-st…
@Spindles – not condoning sign-stealing, but your side is into arson – check the KATU link you posted.