OCA takes stand on water FLUORIDATION
Please take a look at full version of the newsletter that was distributed downtown at city hall on 09/6/2012 by Executive Director Jan Ferrante and Outreach Coordinator, Kira Richards.
THE LETTER SUBMITTED TO SAM ADAMS ON 08-28-12:
August 28, 2012
Sam Adams, Mayor
1221 SW 4th Avenue, Room 340
Portland, OR 97204
Re: Opposition to mandated water fluoridation
Dear Mayor Adams:
The Oregon Chiropractic Association is committed to the health and well being of our patients and the public at large. Our values include the delivery of the clean, pure drinking water to Oregon’s citizens. We share that value with Portlanders who have voted in the past to keep their water supply clear of fluorosilicates or other fluoride products. Our opposition to fluoride includes the following reasons: It is inappropriate to deliver a pharmaceutical through drinking water. There is no dosage monitoring or control; the more water or water containing foods and beverages one ingests, the higher their dose. No allowance can be made for a person’s size, age, or contraindicating health issues.
There is a very low margin of safety between the ADA’s recommended concentration of .7-1.2 ppm, and the EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level Goal for fluoride at 4ppm. Furthermore, twelve scientists on the 2006 National Research Council’s panel, upon exhaustive review of fluoride literature at the behest of the EPA, unanimously concluded that 4ppm is too high to be protective of human health, and the MCLG should be reset at lower than 4ppm. They concluded that fluorosis of teeth, seen in 67% of children living in fluoridated communities, is not merely a cosmetic effect but an adverse health effect. They reported concerns about adverse effects of chronic, very low level fluoride ingestion to musculoskeletal tissues, thyroid and pineal glands, the nervous system, and other tissues, organs, and systems.
People ingest a significant dose of fluoride from sources other than drinking water, and these sources may add up to the goal dose of the ADA/CDC even in nonfluoridated areas. These sources include dental products, pharmaceuticals, and the pesticide residues on foods and in drinks. In fluoridated areas, all foods and beverages prepared or reconstituted with water add to the dose from plain water that an individual drinks.
In November, 2006, the ADA issued an alert stating that fluoridated water should not be used to reconstitute infant formula, and should not be given to children under 1 year old.
The believed benefit of fluoridation has not been borne out by the evidence. The largest study ever conducted in the US by the National Institute of Dental Research in 1986-87 showed a statistically insignificant difference of decay between fluoridated and nonfluoridated areas. Overall, the percentage of decay-free children was about 34% regardless of fluoridation. The NIDR has stated that 90% of cavities in school children occur in pits and fissures of teeth, where fluoride is least effective. WHO health statistic show that decay rates declined similarly in fluoridated and nonfluoridated industrialized countries between 1955 and 2005. The minority of these countries fluoridate their water, and a few fluoridate salt. Published studies from East Germany, Cuba, Canada, and Finland show that three or more years after discontinuing fluoridation, decay rates remained stable or declined further. Boston, Houston, Pittsburgh, Miami, NYC, and Cincinnati continue to report dental decay crises despite long histories of fluoridation.
Meanwhile, the Oral Health America study, which was reviewed by the CDC, published a Report Card in October 2000. Although Oregon got an “F” for its rates of fluoridation, we rated a “B” for children’s oral health(cavities). Washington got a “D” for fluoridation rates, and an “A” for oral health. The only other “A’s” were given to Louisiana, which also got a “D” for fluoridation, and North Carolina, with a “C” for fluoridation.
The products used in artificial water fluoridation (sodium fluorosilicate and hydrofluorosilicic acid) are industrial grade, hazardous waste products from the pollution scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer and aluminum industries. These industries profit by selling their waste products to the public rather than paying to having them disposed of. They contain co-contaminants including arsenic, lead, cadmium, beryllium, and mercury. These chemicals are certified by NSF International, which is a nongovernmental, private, self-regulating body with representatives from the fertilizer and aluminum industries serving as officers of the standards committee a.k.a. the A.W.W.A.
These products have never been tested for safety and effectiveness by the sellers, or at the behest of the CDC or ADA. However, Masters and Coplan’s study (1999) of 280,000 Massachusetts children showed that the childrens’ blood lead levels were significantly higher in communities using these products than they were in towns where water was treated with sodium fluoride or not fluoridated at all.
The Oregon Chiropractic Association joins the thousands of doctors and scientists who oppose water fluoridation. These include 14 Nobel Prize winners, and the EPA employees union chapter 280 which is comprised of the toxicologists, biologists, chemists, engineers, and lawyers of the EPA. Given the mounting science that shows little benefit to teeth with mounting evidence of the cumulative risk from cradle to grave ingestion , governmental decision makers would be wise to show due diligence before mandating such global exposure.
Dan Beeson, DC, OCA President
Cc: Amanda Fritz (Position 1), Nick Fish (Position 2), Dan Saltzman (Position 3) and Randy Leonard (Position 4)