Statement on Fluoride May, 2013 I am troubled to learn that currently in Sonoma County a study is underway that will assess the feasibility of adding fluoride to the county’s water supply for the sake of public dental health. The action is happening as many municipalities around the country and the world are removing the fluoride from their water systems. One can find a wealth of information on the internet pertaining to the fluoride issue on both sides of the argument on its health benefits. I write now to express what I see as the most important facts surrounding the issue. Fluoridating the public water supply amounts to the universal drugging of the people that consume the water. It is impossible to control the dosage level do to differences in peoples’ water consumption, size, age and sensitivity. This fact alone is reason enough for the county supervisors to back away from the plan. It is not the job of elected officials to mass medicate the people without permission. The argument is often made that fluoride is put in the water to contribute to a population’s dental health. There are multiple studies that refute this point. Even if trace amounts of fluoride in the water promote dental health, the chemical is already present in every major brand of toothpaste available today. In fact, it can be difficult to find toothpaste without it. Fluoridated water can be purchased at the drug store under the commercial name “Infant Water.” If you want fluoride as dental medicine, it is widely available for purchase by choice. The City of Santa Rosa Utilities Department issued a Statement on Fluoride in its May 2013 Connections Newsletter. In the article it is stated: Current state fluoride regulation was signed into law by Govenor Pete Wilson in October 1995, and mandates that large water systems with at least 10,000 water connections fluoridate their water when funding is available. Sonoma County’s efforts to fluoridate are not a requirement under state regulations because the SCWA has only 156 water connections. Sonoma County is nowhere near the threshold set by the state. Why are the supervisors taking this action when it is not required? Adding fluoride to the water supply will cost a significant amount of money. Why spend it on a plan that isn’t at all required or necessary?
Posted on: Sat, 08 Jun 2013 22:50:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015