PINELLAS COUNTY UTILITIES’ BROCHURE ON FLUORIDE DEBUNKED
All Pinellas County Residents recently received an expensive, slick, attractive, brochure in the mail from the Pinellas County Utilities Department (PCU). Click here to read the brochure as it appears on the Pinellas County website.
That brochure is part of a large scale public relations campaign by Pinellas County to try to convince you that adding fluoride to the water is safe and for your benefit, in accordance with the County Commissioners’ 8/26/03 decision to fluoridate all water supplies in Pinellas County.
Below we have contrasted the unsubstantiated PR fluff in the question and answer segment of that brochure with thoroughly documented and referenced scientific information so that you may judge for yourself whether or not their answers are accurate.
We will first present the question raised in the PCU brochure.
Following the question, we will present the text of PCU’s answer to the question (on the left), compared to documented scientific data (on the right).
Before looking at this comparative data, however, you may find it interesting to note that up through 10/15/03 (and possibly later), the Pinellas County Utilities web site had this to say about fluoridation in response to the question:
“Is there fluoride in the water?”
“Pinellas County water contains a small amount of naturally occurring fluoride, but it is only one-tenth the amount needed to prevent tooth decay. The City of Belleair is the only town in the area, which does fluoridate their water. In 1976 Pinellas County citizens voted against a referendum concerning the addition of fluoride to our drinking water. Addition of fluoride would increase the cost of water significantly and fluoride is only needed in drinking water, not in water for other household uses or for irrigation.”
This data was still posted almost two months after the County Commissioners approved fluoridation! (You can see a copy of the actual portion of their old web site FAQ page - which we saved before they altered it - by clicking here and scrolling to question number 22). That said, we hope you find the following comparison useful.
|
|
||
|
What the Brochure Claims As with other nutrients, fluoride is safe and effective when used and consumed properly. More than 50 years of evidence from 162 million Americans and nearly 60 other countries supports the effectiveness of fluoridated water and its ability to inhibit, reduce, or even reverse the onset and development of tooth decay. Through continuous research, drinking optimally fluoridated water has been scientifically proven to be safe (not toxic) and effective. |
What the Facts Reveal According to Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, fluoride is more toxic than lead and just slightly less toxic than arsenic1, one of the most toxic substances known. The chemicals fluorosilicic acid or its salt, sodium fluorosilicate, are used to fluoridate over 90% of the water supplies in the To protect the environment, industry is mandated to limit the release of toxic fluoride gases and other pollutants into the air. When the wet scrubbers capture these gases, they are diluted and, together with other pollutants from the scrubbers, form hazardous waste liquor. This unprocessed pollution concentrate (which is about 25% hydrofluorosilicic acid7) is what is used to fluoridate municipal water supplies. The only other place it may legally be disposed of is a hazardous waste site. Such disposal is costly, whereas the sale of the waste to water utility companies is profitable. Of serious concern is the fact that two recent peer-reviewed studies (Neurotoxicology, Dec. 2000 and International Journal of Environmental Studies, Sept. 1999) have found an association between consumption of water containing hydrofluorosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride and elevated blood levels of LEAD in children.8 This is an alarming finding because lead toxicity is linked with a number of health and behavioral problems, including gastrointestinal complaints, anxiety, chronic fatigue, seizures, insomnia, learning disabilities, confusion and arthritis.9 That is why lead was banned as an additive to paint and gasoline. One of the authors of the above referenced studies, Myron Coplan, P.E., in conjunction with EPA scientist, Robert Carton, PhD, points out that the American Public Health Association’s long-standing endorsement of fluoridation fails to take into account the fact that there has been Other studies, both epidemiological (population) and animal, have linked fluoride with such serious conditions as kidney damage11, cancer12, hyperactivity13, lowered IQ14, impaired immunity15, lowered thyroid activity16 and skeletal fluorosis (arthritic symptoms).17 In their reply to this question,
The fluoride Pinellas County put in our drinking water, is a toxic waste from phosphate plants like this one in Florida.
A fluoride smile.
The effects of fluoride overdose on teeth.
Skeletal fluorosis Long term accumulation of high levels of fluoride in the bones can cause severe skeletal fluorosis.
|
|
2. What level of fluoride will be added? |
||
|
What the Brochure Claims
Natural fluoride levels in
* parts per million, ppm, is equivalent to one cent in $10,000 |
What the Facts Reveal The county will add fluoride (in the form of hydrofluorosilicic acid) at levels of 0.8 ppm in accordance with guidelines established in the early 1940s when water fluoridation first began. At that time, it was thought that a dose range between 0.8 and 1.2 ppm was sufficient to prevent cavities and dental fluorosis (a condition characterized by white or brown spots on the teeth and accompanied by pitting and increased porosity in severe cases, affecting children during tooth-forming years). Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary defines dental fluorosis as a condition resulting from chronic fluoride intoxication or a pathological effect [emphasis mine]. This effect at very low levels is generally seen in malnourished children who are deficient in the nutrients needed to offset the effects of fluoride toxicity. Well-nourished children can generally tolerate higher levels of fluoride before showing outward signs of toxicity. In addition to concerns about dental fluorosis and other health risks posed by fluoridation at ‘optimal’ levels, there is the element of added risk posed by potential fluoride overdose. Even if the fluoride dose level in drinking water is held at a constant 0.8 ppm, total overall exposure must be taken into consideration. Because the majority of major US cities have been fluoridated for several decades now, the environment has become saturated with the element. Any food that is grown on soils treated with phosphate fertilizer, sprayed with fluoride-based pesticides, irrigated with fluoridated water, and/or processed with such water, will be high in fluoride. Likewise, beverages bottled in fluoridated cities will have elevated levels of fluoride. We’re all aware of the fact that virtually every toothpaste on the market today is fluoridated, as are many other dental products. Further sources of fluoride exposure include tobacco smoke, industry pollution, insecticides, some vitamins and some bottled waters. Hundreds of medications have a fluoride base, including such widely used drugs as Prozac, Paxil and the antibiotic Cipro. Add to this the fact that many people cook with non-stick cookware, which is made with a form of fluoride, and the potential for overdose is significant. In 1991, the Dept. of Health and Human Services estimated that in fluoridated communities, the range of exposure was between 1.58 mg. and 6.6 mg. per day; this overlaps the dose range once medically used to suppress thyroid activity in patients with overactive thyroid glands (2.27 to 4.54 A further concern regarding fluoridation levels is related to the potential for malfunction of dose-monitoring machinery. There have been numerous mechanical fluoride dispenser failures in the |
|
|
3. What are the benefits of fluoridation? |
||
|
What the Brochure Claims Health experts endorse water fluoridation as the single, most effective public health measure to improve oral health. Water fluoridation can reduce tooth decay. Fluoride strengthens tooth enamel. Fluoride protects a baby’s first teeth. Water fluoridation is a cost effective means to improving community dental health. |
What the Facts Reveal The claimed benefits of strengthening tooth enamel, reducing tooth decay and protecting baby’s first teeth cannot be substantiated. In recent years, tooth decay has declined in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. Some studies indicate benefit; others do not. Where benefit is shown, it is usually marginal.22 Rather than strengthening tooth enamel, the net result of fluoridation will actually be quite the opposite, for fluoride interferes with collagen-forming mechanisms.27 As to the claim that fluoride protects baby’s teeth, consider this: As of April 1994, the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs issued new guidelines for physicians prescribing fluoride. These new guidelines prohibit doctors from prescribing more than 0.25 mg. of fluoride per day (the equivalent of one cup of fluoridated water) for children 6 months to 3 years of age.31 |
|
|
|
||
|
What the Brochure Claims The entire community benefits from water fluoridation regardless of a person’s age, income, level of education, or ability to get dental care. A concentration of 0.8 ppm of fluoride can reduce the amount of cavities in children’s baby teeth by as much as 60% and reduce tooth decay in adults by nearly 35%. |
What the Facts Reveal Clearly it’s the phosphate fertilizer companies who benefit. They have sold their hazardous waste liquor containing hydrofluorosilicic acid to cities, such as St. Petersburg33 (through a middle man) for .305 cents per gallon.34 Far from benefiting from fluoridation, there are subsets of the population that are "unusually susceptible to its toxic effects." |
|
5. What will water fluoridation cost? |
||
|
What the Brochure Claims Pinellas County Utilities estimates a cost of $300,000 to construct the fluoridation system with an annual cost of $115,000 for adding fluoride to the drinking water. This will be absorbed into current operating costs, an average of approximately 32 cents per customer per year, and will not require a water rate increase.
|
What the Facts Reveal As recently as October 15, 2003, Pinellas County Utilities’ web site claimed that fluoridation would "increase the cost of water significantly!" Contrast that reply with their current one. Their figures, "32 cents per customer per year", represent the projected cost of installation of equipment and addition of fluoride. They do not take into account medical costs that arise from conditions related to fluoridation, but are not recognized as such. For example, skeletal fluorosis, which develops as a result of accumulation of fluoride in the bones, is not recognized as a problem in our society today; in fact, it’s not even mentioned in the Merck Manual, the physician’s diagnostic reference book. However, there is a virtual epidemic today of arthritis, and the symptoms of arthritis are indistinguishable from those of the early stages of skeletal fluorosis.35 Another consideration is the fact that fluoride is the most corrosive of all known elements.36 As such, it attacks nickel, copper and even steel, making it very difficult to contain. Even the reaction vessels used in phosphate plants (made of the alloy Hastelloy G-30) to house phosphoric acid only last on the average of three years.37 It is predictable then that erosion of waterpipes and mains may occur, necessitating costly replacement.
| |
|
What the Brochure Claims The Florida Department of Health recommends that prescription dietary fluoride supplements should not be given to any child who lives or goes to school in a fluoridated water community. However, you should consult the pediatrician or dentist who prescribed the supplement before making any decisions. |
What the Facts Reveal This cannot be definitively answered here without risk of treading into the taboo realm of giving medical advice. However, bear in mind the legal prescribing limits mentioned in question 3. To complete those guidelines: The recommended daily dose of fluoride for a child between the ages of 3 and 6 is 0.50 mg. (2 cups of fluoridated water), and for a child between 8 and 16 years of age, the recommended dose is 1.0 mg/day (l liter, a little over a quart). Bear in mind here, however, that fluoride is readily absorbed through the skin38, so bath and shower water will be a source of exposure, as well as other sources mentioned in question 2. An informed decision regarding fluoride supplements must take into account total overall exposure from all sources, which can be difficult to calculate, as well as the toxicity of the element. It is important also to know that, despite the fact that the government published a ‘reference daily intake’ for it in 1999, fluoride is not an essential nutrient since animals fed diets containing little or none of it do not develop adverse symptoms, nor do they fail to grow: There are no fluoride-deficiency diseases.39 |
|
|
|
||
|
What the Brochure Claims Yes. Fluoridated water is part of a total oral health program. You can get additional protection when you brush with fluoride toothpaste. You should make sure your young children do not swallow toothpaste. |
What the Facts Reveal The fluoride in your toothpaste is a less toxic form (sodium fluoride) than that to be used in our water (hydrofluorosilicic acid), and it is more pure (pharmaceutical, not industrial grade). However, before brushing with fluoridated toothpaste, read the warning label on the tube, and brush at your own risk! Also, bear in mind that when fluoridated toothpastes were first introduced in 1955, their labels warned against use by people living in fluoridated communities.40 Crest even went so far as to warn that their fluoridated toothpaste should not be used at all by children under 6.41 |
|
|
What the Brochure Claims
Yes. Fluoride is safe for pets including aquatic life. Having fluoride in the water dish may even benefit the dental health of those pets with teeth. |
What the Facts Reveal Hydrofluorosilicic acid has not even been established to be safe for humans! Its’ effect on animals, though not formally studied, can be gauged to some degree from cases of crippled cattle, dead fish and injured wildlife found in the vicinity of fluoride-emitting factories a common occurrence in the days prior to mandatory pollution control when deadly fluoride gases escaped into the environment. |
|
|
What the Brochure Claims Virtually all major national and international health, service and professional organizations endorse or support water fluoridation, including the following: American Dental Association (ADA) |
What the Facts Reveal Before fluoridation began in the mid 1940’s, the American Medical Association (AMA), American Dental Association (ADA) and the Public Health Department all stood in opposition to it. Fluoridation gained the support of medical organizations largely as a result of political manipulation, coupled with a highly successful public relations strategy (click here to see article, The American Dental Association publishes an impressive list of supporting organizations, but it’s a list that has shrunk over the years for two reasons: Some organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union42, were erroneously listed as supporters and thus had to ask to be removed from the list; other organizations have withdrawn support they once gave for fluoridation in light of the growing evidence of the dangers it poses. Those who have withdrawn support for fluoridation since 1990 (or who never supported it to begin with but were none-the-less listed as supporters) include:43
In addition,CLICK HERE for a list of Nobel Prize winners who have either opposed fluoridation or have expressed reservations about it. |
|
10. Where can I find out more information about water fluoridation? |
||
|
What the Brochure Claims Visit the following web sites for more information on community water fluoridation: |
What the Facts Reveal This website, www.AquaSafe.us, links to other excellent fluoride sites, after the initial slide presentation. Or, log on to those sites directly: The following books are recommended for the professional and intelligent layman alike:
All of the above, and many other books on fluoride, are available through Also, please plan to attend our educational meetings at the Clearwater East Library on the third Saturday of every month (10 to noon) for slide show, lecture and videos. |
|
1 Barry Groves, Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death?, Newleaf, 2001, p. 91 (based on LD50 data from Robert E. Gosselia, et.al., Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, 5th edition, 1984). 2 http://www.slweb.org/chemicals.html. 3 Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, Fluoride the Aging Factor,3rd edition,Health Action Press, , 1993, p. 185 (1983 quote from Rebecca Hammer, then EPA deputy assistant administrator) 4 George Glasser, “Water Fluoridation: the Enhanced Toxicity Factor, Sarasota ECO Report, June/July, 1995. 5 American Water Works Association, AWWA Standard for Hydrofluosilicic Acid, July 1, 1989, p. vii. 6 http://www.fipr.state.fl.us/envserv.htm 7 Op.Cit., American Water Works Association, p. v. 8 http://www.slweb.org/chemicals.html 9 James F. Balch, MD and Phyllis A. Balch, CNC,Prescription for Nutritional Healing, 2nd edition, Avery Publishing group, 1997, p. 363. 10 http://www.slweb.org/APHA-silicofluorides.html 11 Op.Cit., Groves, p. 100-102. 12 Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, Fluoride the Aging Factor,2nd edition, Health Action Press, 1986, p. 63-71. 13 Op. cit., Groves, p. 68-69. 14. Ibid, p. 64-66. 15. Op. Cit., Yiamouyiannis, p. 22-24. 16. Ibid, p. 20. 17. Ibid, p. 40-48. 18 Op. Cit., Groves, p. 217, 19 Op. Cit., Yiamouyiannis, 3rd edition, p. 44. 20 Ibid, p. 45 21 Pierre M. Galletti and Gustave Joyel, “Effect of Fluorine on Thyroidal Iodine Metabolism in Hyperthyroidism,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology, Vol. 18 (Oct. 1958), pgs. 1102-1110. 22 Paul, Ellen and Michael Connett, “Fluoridation: Time for a Second Look”,” May 10, 2001,www.rachel.org/bulletin/bulletin.cfm?Issue_ID=2001 23 Op.Cit., Grove, p. 20. 24 J.A. Brunelle and J.P. Carlos, “Recent Trends in Dental Caries 25 Centers for Disease Control, “Achievements in Public Health, 1990-1999: Fluoridation of Drinking Water to Prevent Dental Caries,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 48, No. 41 (Oct.22, 1999), pgs. 933-940. 26 www.lauralee.com/news/fluorideabsurd.htm 27 Op.Cit., Yiamouyiannis, 2nd edition, p. 30. 28 Ibid, p. 33. 29 Ibid, p. 34. 30 Op., Cit., Groves, p. 170. 31 Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol. 126, June 1995. 32 Ibid. 33 “Fluoride Recovery in the Fertilizer Industry: A Review,” Phosphorous and Potassium, #103,Sept./Oct. 1979, pgs. 33-39. 34 Contract Pricing Invoice, City of St. Petersburg, 8/26/99 (48,000 gallons purchased for a total of $14,640) 35 Op. Cit., Groves, p. 235. 36 Merck Index, Merck Research Laboratories, 1996. 37 Op. Cit., Groves, p. 205. 38 Op. Cit., Groves, p. 275. 39 Ibid, p. 258 40 George L. Waldbott, MD, Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma, Coronado Press, Inc., 1978, p. 307. 41 Ibid. 42 Op.. Cit., Groves, p. 113. 43 Ibid, Groves. |
Posted by admin
in News
0 comments
