FAN Bulletin 807:

May 13, 2007

Dear All,

In a very significant move, an Oregon doctor (Dr. Alan Bates), who is also a State Senator, has circulated a statement explaining why he is opposed to water fluoridation to all the Oregon State House representatives. The timing is extremely important because tomorrow (Monday May 14) the House will be voting on House Bill 3099, which if it passes, will require mandatory fluoridation in all communities above 10,000. The letter is printed below.

Meanwhile, Oregon Citizens for Safe Drinking Water (OCSDW) is asking people to pull out all the stops to flood the house representatives with emails, and phone calls, stating that “we don’t want fluoride in our drinking water.”

Kimberly Kaminski tells us that this vote was supposed to have taken place last week, but proponents have delayed the vote three times, perhaps over concern that they don’t have the votes necessary to pass the bill.

However, at this point, the votes are much too close to call. URGENT If you have any friends, colleagues or relatives in Oregon please ask them to help in any way they can to stop the passage of this terrible bill. Please do not write in unless you are a state resident – this would be counter-productive. It is your contacts in Oregon we need to help. Please ask them to:

1) To contact their state representative and urge him or her to VOTE NO on HB 3099. To find the relevant legislator, click on this link, then scroll down to find your state representative: http://www.leg.state.or.us/findlegsltr/

2) To call and/or email their state representative TODAY or FIRST THING MONDAY MORNING to urge him or her to VOTE NO on HB 3099.

Quick Talking Points: (1) Serious questions exist about the safety and efficacy of fluoridation; (2) In light of recent science showing fluoride’s harmful effects, policy makers must err on the side of caution; (3) Significant questions exist concerning the compounds used for fluoridation; until these questions are answered, policy makers should not rush forth to force fluoridation on every citizen of this state; (4) Fluoridation is unnecessary; unethical; ineffective; unreliable; unsafe; inequitable; unscientifically promoted; and a massive distraction from the real causes of tooth decay.

OCSDW has been quietly working behind the scenes to galvanize support for this legislative battle. Most notably, during the past year, it has worked to educate the most active members of the Oregon Conservation Network about the issue and secured OCN’s commitment to actively oppose any pro-fluoridation bills. They’ve been meeting with legislators and policy makers to educate them about recent scientific evidence that throws into question the safety and efficacy of water fluoridation.

They have been working with other environmental organizations sending out flyers, making phone calls, providing information and written testimony to key policy makers, making long distance phone calls, and driving back and forth to Salem to lobby and testify at committee and subcommittee hearings on this bill.

It has been a costly battle. OCSDW, along with Columbia Riverkeeper, paid to fly me from upstate New York to testify against the mandatory fluoridation bill when it was before the house Health Care Subcommittee. In addition, OCSDW has incurred significant copy, postage and phone costs. The proponents of fluoridation are well organized and well funded, and have instituted the biggest push ever to force fluoride on the citizens of Oregon.

Whatever help you can provide to OCSDW, either by contacting any one you know in Oregon, or by sending a donation would be greatly appreciated. The team of people fighting this battle is extremely determined and well organized. Whatever help you can give them will help us all. Contact:

Kimberly A. Kaminski, Executive Director
Oregon Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
PO Box 13307
Portland, Oregon 97213-0307
(503) 675-7451
ocsdw@earthlink.net

Kimberly Kaminski writes:

“At this time, the vote is very, very close. If the bill passes the house, we will have to battle it in the Senate. If it passes the Senate, Governor Kulongoski has said he will sign it into law.

As with past legislative years, this bill has greatly challenged us in terms of our human and financial resources. We have worked hard, but there is much to be done. Please consider the personal value you place on clean, safe water and donate as you can to assist us in prevailing yet again this session.”

Paul Connett
———————————————–

State Senator Bates letter

DR. ALAN BATES
State Senator
DISTRICT 3
SOUTHERN OREGON

900 Court Street NE S-3 12
Salem, Oregon 97301
Phone: (503) 986-1703
Fax: (503) 986-1140

sen.alanbates@state.or.us

April 20, 2007

Dear Colleagues:

First, do no harm.

As you are likely aware, the Oregon Legislature will once again be asked to mandate that Oregon cities add fluoridation chemicals to their drinking water. As you consider your position on Senate Bill 33, House Bill 3099 and any other mandatory water fluoride measures which may appear throughout session, I want to bring to your attention several new scientific studies and new public health warnings related to the possible adverse effects of water fluoridation. I also want to clarify the reasons I oppose this mandatory fluoridation bill, and why I am sponsoring SB 803 with Senator Vicki Walker to make topical fluoride treatments available to all Oregon children.

First, I am always open to new studies that demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation. As a medical student, I was taught that water fluoridation was a public benefit and that there were no potential health threats associated with water fluoridation. However, when faced with taking a position on mandatory fluoridation of public water, I felt a responsibility to evaluate the actual science available on this issue to be certain that I could justify my position. Ultimately, I found conflicting evidence of the effectiveness and safety of water fluoridation.

In the last decade, the practice of medicine has begun the long overdue process of transforming itself into outcome based practices. The lack of solid data on water fluoridation is unfortunately not unusual. I have reviewed conflicting scientific studies that report that water fluoridation is safe and unsafe. What is clear is that water fluoridation is only effective as the water passes over the teeth and is not effective as a result of swallowing and absorption. As such, topical applications are effective and are safe.

My reasons for opposing a mandatory water-fluoridation bill at this time include:

Consistent scientific evidence supporting the benefits of fluoride in topical applications (as in toothpaste or mouthwash) and that swallowing fluoride in drinking water provides little to no benefits for children’s teeth. This is supported by U.S. CDC and Dept. of Health Services data that shows that increasing the percentage of the population receiving fluoridated water has no clear effect on improving children’s’ dental health (1);

2. New studies discussed below highlight that there are potential threats to public health from water fluoridation that have not been fully addressed;

3. Lack of access to preventative dental care is the major indicator of risk to children’s dental health; and

4. Upholding local control, as much as possible, is an important tenant in our work here. Currently there is no law prohibiting local jurisdictions from adopting local water fluoridation measures should they decide it is appropriate. Given the significant public interest on the issue of water fluoridation and the growing evidence about its possible risks, the question of fluoridation, for the present, should be left to local cities, their health professionals, and local residents.

My concerns about water fluoridation have been amplified by several recent studies and public health warnings including:

Harvard Bone Cancer Study

In April 2006, Harvard dental researchers published a multi-year study in Harvard’s widely respected cancer journal which reported that exposure to fluoride at the levels considered “optimum” by the ADA, increased the risk of bone cancer in boys by more than 500%. (2) The Harvard study, which was funded by the National Institute of Health, was the most comprehensive of studies considering the fluoride1 bone cancer link to date.

While this study should be followed up with additional scientific evaluation, this does not change the concern that evidence now supports the possibility that boys drinking fluoridated water may face more than a 500% increased risk of bone cancer.

We’ve known for years that fluoride can cause increased cell growth in bones, and fluoride based drugs have even been used to increase bone density in patients with osteoporosis. That fluoride may stimulate uncontrolled cellular growth (cancer) in bones during childhood is a sobering revelation that should give us pause.

The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences

In March of 2006, an extensive report from the National Research Council recommended that the U.S. EPA lower its current drinking water maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride based on the health threats it identified at fluoride concentrations lower than the current 4 parts per million (ppm) standard. (3) For comparison, intentionally fluoridated water typically occurs at 1 ppm.

The NRC report is highly relevant to the issue of water fluoridation since it details a broad range of scientific studies linking very low concentration fluoride exposure to adverse health impacts ranging from increase bone fractures and neurological damage, to impacts on the immune and reproductive systems. Contrary to the claims that the Legislature has heard for a number of sessions that there are no credible scientific studies about the adverse effects of fluoride, the NAS report gives a strong scientific basis to be concerned with the effects of fluoridation. While some have asserted that this study is unrelated to drinking water (because the study focused on whether 4 ppm of fluoride in water was safe and drinking water is typically fluoridated at 1 ppm), the American Dental Association specifically relied on the NRC report as a basis for issuing a new warning against the use of fluoridated water in infant formula.

New warnings against using fluoridated water for mixing infant formula

In the wake of National Academy of Sciences study, on November 9,2006 the American Dental Association issued an interim recommendation that fluoridated water should not be used to mix infant formula. (4) Similar warnings have also been issued by the U.S. Center for Disease Control and the Oregon Dept. of Health and Human Services. (5) The warnings were based on the evidence showing that infants who drink fluoridated baby formula can exceed the recommended maximum daily dose of fluoride and this could result in damage to teeth called “fluorosis.” This recommendation is important because for low income families in fluoridated communities there is no practical alternative to using fluoridated tap water for infant formula. Mandating water fluoridation throughout Oregon, could therefore lead to over fluoridation of the very populations water fluoridation is intended to help.

Professionally Applied Topical Fluoride: Unlike studies on the effectiveness and safety of water fluoridation, there is clear and consistent peer-reviewed scientific evidence on the effectiveness and overall safety of professionally applied topical fluoride treatments. Several clinical studies over the past decade have reinforced previous scientific evidence that regular topical fluoride treatments significantly reduce the incidence of dental caries (commonly known as “cavities”), especially among high-risk populations.

Conclusion: In light of these new findings and warnings, it does not make sense for Oregon to mandate fluoridation to local cities at this time. There is a real need for additional scientific study, and until such studies are complete, scientific evidence tells us that any claimed benefits of water fluoridation do not justify the risks. Proposing a state-wide mandate for water fluoridation simply takes our eye off the ball. A better option to continuing this debate on mandatory water fluoridation is to reform health care… part of that reform is better dental care for everyone in Oregon. That is why I am sponsoring SB 803 with Senator Vicki Walker to make topical fluoride treatments available to all Oregon children. When the Governor’s Healthy Kids legislation passes, currently uninsured children will have access to essential dental care. However, children that have health insurance, but lack dental care, will be left underserved. Senate Bill 803 will ensure that professionally applied topical fluoride treatments are available to all children, whether covered by Healthy Kids or through private insurance. Lack of access to preventative dental care is a major indicator of risk to children’s dental health, and we must address this issue at its root.

Thank you for considering this issue.

Sincerely,

Dr. Alan Bates
State Senator
District 3

References cited

1. Data on oral health from National Survey of Children’s Health. http://mchb.hrsa.gov/oralhealth/state.htm U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, The National Survey of Children’s Health 2003. Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2005; U.S. Center for Disease control data re: Percent of states population that is fluoridated

2. Bassin, E, Wypij D, Davis RB, Mittleman MA (2006). Age-specific fluoride exposure in drinking water and osteosarcoma (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2006. 17:421428.

3. Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. The National Academies Press, Wash. D.C.

4. American Dental Association E-Gram. Nov. 9,2006. Interim Guidance on Reconstituted Infant Formula.

5. Oregon Department of Human Services, “Recommendations for Use of Fluoridated Water for Mixing Infant Formula.” December 20, 2006.