Fairbanks city officials verify fluoride initiative sponsors
Published Friday, July 4, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!FAIRBANKS — The debate over fluoride treatment is making a comeback after the 10 initiative sponsors were verified by the city on July 2. Initiative sponsors now have 90 days to collect signatures from city residents to petition that the fluoride issue be placed on the October ballot.
Last year, the fluoride ordinance went up for a revote before the council but failed to remove fluoride from city water.
The city has treated the water with fluoride for the last 48 years.
The city of North Pole and the University of Alaska Fairbanks do not treat water with fluoride.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
If the council has voted to end fluoridation- the expense of this effort could have been avoided.
Fairbanks will be just like Juneau in voting to eliminate this poison from our water.
Here's to clean water.
Here. Here.
Dr. William Bailey representing the Centers for Disease Control gave untruthful information to the Fairbanks City Council when he "testified" before them about the safety of water fluoridation.
The CDC does not do any original fluoride/fluoridation research but rely on systematic reviews of fluoride research by other US agencies or countries, Bailey said.
Bailey told the Fairbanks City Council: “The systematic reviews which I am talking about – the [Australian] National Health and Medical Research Council – the National Research Council in 2006 – the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATSDR)in 2003 – the Forum on Fluoridation in 2002 in Ireland – the University of York [UK] in 2000 [York Review] and so forth… they have all said that water fluoridation is safe and effective and healthy”
The truth is:
The National Research Council was asked to determine whether the 4 mg/L maximum contaminant level goal set by the Environmental Protection Agency is safe. It isn’t and must be lowered. Neither the NRC nor the EPA determined a safe level, yet. It could turn out to be near zero, as three panel members suggest. And the NRC was not asked and didn't look at the effectiveness of fluoridation.
Contrary to Bailey's claim, York Review researchers report, "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.”
The ATSDR reports, "Some existing data indicate that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with osteoporosis, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, vitamin C, and/or protein."
The transcript of Bailey's misguided testimony with a critique is here: http://www.fluoridealert.org/bailey1.htm...
The CDC needs to tell the American people what information they used to declare fluoridation to be one of the last century's greatest achievements.
Lately we see how federal agencies get "arm-twisted" for political purposes to put out false information that isn't protective of the public.
Federal officials touting fluoridation safety, including Bailey, need to face Congressional hearings where they can testify under oath about why they still endorse and mislead people about fluoridation.
You can help by contacting your federal representatives here:
http://congress.FluorideAction.Net
...............and here we go again.
here we go....waste of time again
Truck Nutz, crooked politicians, a corrupt chamber of commerce, "the sound of freedom," "dumpster-dive or die" activists, anti-fluoridation conspiracy theorist freakazoids...What a town we live in. News-Miner reporters aren't lacking material, are they?
Listen to the scientific studies not the ranters who have never read one. The City of Poughkeepsie recently stopped fluoridation after asking a long list of specific health and safety question and proof of benefit and for specific chemical. Not one of the 33 suppliers would state the product fit for humans of beneficial. The health department would not answer a single question and after a year th commission voted strongly to end fluoridation. Statements of policy but no facts. What are the CDC ,Health department ,EPA for anyway. In over three years I am still amazed how the answers to specific questions never rarely answer the question. Just statement of policy and list of endorsements. The comic book version of fluoride myth. The risks that are well known are hidden from us and all we hear is safe for all and everyone benefits. Is it a benefit to have 51% of children with dental fluorosis.(Pizzo 2007). The York review 2000 showed 15% became 48% when fluoridation started. 12.5% had ugly enough damage to require cosmetic restoration. Are we informed this is a likely negative side effect. Informed consent requires information. We need to know total dose from all foods and beverages not just 1ppm is optimal thus safe .The EPA has admitted that dose had drasticly increased in the last 20 years. We only need to look at the huge increase in dental fluorosis to know that is true. We can see teeth ,what is happening that we can not see from this cumulative toxin. The 2006 NRC suggest many unpleasant things. Go to fluoridealert.org or waterloowatch.com to see videos or studies. Jim Schultz
Ok the people dont want flouride in the water why dont they just quit adding it and be down with this. Hey water morons we dont want flouride so stop using it you donkeys. Its that simple just stop using it and this freaking issue will be dead. How stupid are the people at the water plant we dont want flouride in our water. If you are do dumb do brush your teeth then tough ****.
The H2SiF6 HFSA that is added comes directly from EPA ordered smokestack pollution toxin scrubbers. Fluoride had more lawsuits against it for air pollution then all other air pollutants combined. Cattle and crops and people downwind suffered. Glass can be etched at 1ppm HF acid which is common around factories with fluoride emissions. The HFSA has about 20 other contaminates in it with arsenic in the product often being the main source of arsenic in a cities water. The goal for lead and arsenic is zero. Most lead in a homes water is also there because HFSA is frantastic at leaching lead from brass(water meters, fittings ,shut offs,faucets) and copper pipes and solder. It has been known to make copper pipes in to swiss cheese when the complex issues of PH ,and corrosion control chemicals are not used correctly. The ortho phosphate and poly phosphate and others used sometimes just do not do the job depending upon the variables of the water. Willian Maas tested over 150,000 homes for lead for the EPA and kept on being surprised on how much lead the HFSA could leach into the water. The new disinfectant now used chloramine makes HFSA much more corrosive. Maas 2007 showed up to 900% increase leached lead. Everybody is smart enough to know lead is bad especially to kids with all the lead paint toys from China. Now up to half of the cities are using toxic contaminated wastes from China instead of from Florida. Never mentioned is the phosphate mines also produced uranium but just leave it in the acid now because they were losing money from the recovery units after 1992. That explains why it has so many radioactive decay products. The cities do not mention it to us because some people might object to the truth. The truth is very ugly with fluoride as no current researcher can show ingested benefit. The theory of ingested fluoride was false but now the claim is topical reminerization of exposed teeth. 1ppm has no topical effect so this can not be true either. Facts have no place in fluoridation promotion so all debate is avoided and only policy is stated. A good lie repeated enough can become the truth to most. Show us the science please. We paid for it. Let us not ignore it as this is a cumulative toxin which builds in your body slowly but surely just like lead and arsenic but we can have 267 times more in the water legally. Not very logical even if it did reduce cavities in poor kids. But we now know for sure it damages their teeth worse then the whites. What a cruel joke. The native americans in Alaska and Canada have been expermented upon with 4ppm and even 5ppm which are both illegal high levels and 100% of the kids got dental fluorsis but the cavities did not seem to decrease. They also did this in over 400 schools in the lower 48 for yucks. Failed also but they try to keep mistakes quiet. Jim Schultz
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.