May 11, 2017

Archives for February 2012

Utilities commission recommends city council stop fluoridating water, requests more information so city can have full debate

By: Beatrice Fantoni (Reporter), The Windsor Star, Windsor, Ontario 29-Feb-2012 — They (Windsor Utilities Commission) voted in favour of recommending to city council to stop water fluoridation for five years and redirect any funds recuperated into oral hygiene and nutrition education.

“This (fluoridation policy) has been in place for 59 years. It deserves a review – a thorough review,” said Coun. Bill Marra, who stepped down from chairing the meeting in order to second Coun. Drew Dilken’s motion at the WUC meeting on Wednesday night.

“I’m prepared to have this debate at a full council meeting,” Marra said. “Clearly we’re not in a position to make a full decision. Council is.”

Four out of the five commission members present voted in favour of the recommendation, with Coun. Ed Sleiman voting against the motion.

Residents, local dentists as well as the medical officer of health Dr. Alan Heimann made five-minute presentations to the WUC after which commission members posed clarification questions. About 40 people are at the meeting in the city’s council chambers where at times the discussion grew a bit heated as presenters on either side of the debate answered the commission’s questions.

After the vote, Dilkens, Marra and Heimann all said that many more questions were raised at the meeting than there were answers, so much more debate and research is needed on the issue of whether the city should continue to fluoridate tap water.

Heimann said it was his sense that two main questions that emerged centred on what constitutes a safe amount of fluoride in tap water (if any) and whether or not hydrofluorosilicic acid – which is used to fluoridate tap water – is indeed safe.

“There is a lot of conflicting information that we need to work through,” Heimann said. “It’s going to be my job … to assist in the provision of this information.”

Dilkens said that much like learning to wash our hands to prevent a cold, preventing tooth decay is ultimately a matter of personal hygiene that can be taught to children by their parents. It might not require fluoridating the water, especially when there is research to show that the industrial grade hydrofluorosilic acid used in tap water is derived from phosphate fertilizers rather than a natural source, he said.

“There were a lot of questions asked that I didn’t get solid answers to,” Dilkens said.  “It’s worth having the discussion, gathering the information and coming to a conclusion for the benefit of the residents.”

In their presentations, local dentists as well as Heimann reiterated to the commission that fluoridation remains an effective, equitable and economical way of preventing tooth decay.

On the other side of the debate, residents, a local nurse and members of the group Fluoride Free Windsor cited research showing fluoridated water has been linked to medical conditions such as thyroid problems and kidney stones. As well, there are no protections in place for wildlife exposed to fluoridated water.

“I feel more research needs to be done to satisfy all,” said one local resident, adding that changing diets could also help reduce the problem of tooth decay, thereby doing away with the need to fluoridate water. “If fluoridation is so beneficial in 2012 why aren’t citizen organizations in Leamtington … standing up and calling (for it)?”

Kim De Yong of Fluoride Free Windsor said she was pleased that the commission upheld its mandate to provide safe water. She said the group will now work to provide the commission with the peer reviewed evidence which shows ingesting fluoride is not safe.

With the recommendation to council, it will be up to the city’s 11 councillors to debate the issue and decide whether to continue fluoridating tap water. Marra said there is no definite time line for the process. The next step will be to notify the provincial government to determine what legal process must be followed to bring the issue to city council, he said.

Marra said he expects it will take another few months to gather more research and the right legal information before the city council can start discussions on the matter.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/02/29/utilities-commission-hears-presentations-from-experts-public-on-water-fluoridation/

‘More Doctors Smoke Camels’ — When water fluoridation was introduced!

By: Doug Schmidt (Reporter), The Windsor Star, Windsor, Ontario 27-Feb-2012 — To the critics of fluoride, it’s pretty straightforward: Windsorites are being mass medicated without their consent with an industry-sourced waste chemical that is considered too toxic to be released directly into the environment, but which is considered safe enough to be added to our drinking water.

To its backers, it’s equally simple: Fluoridation of municipal drinking water is one of the cheapest, most effective ways to combat tooth decay in children, it’s been flowing from our taps for more than a half-century, and an exhaustive list of government authorities gush that it’s one of the best public health achievements of the past century.

Windsor’s council and mayor will soon be forced to play doctor and decide on whether the city continues a practice that a growing number of cities are backing out of.

It will become increasingly harder for the politicos to ignore the issue — as of Jan. 1, 2013, changes to Ontario’s Safe Drinking Water Act will make municipally elected officials legally responsible for negligence related to municipal water systems. If half the scary stuff the critics are saying is true, then I foresee future lawsuits in our increasingly litigious society. The fluoride contrarians like to point out that during the era when the stuff first entered our homes via the plumbing, advertisers were also advising us that “more doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.”

Windsor Utilities Commission is hosting a special public meeting on fluoridation at city hall on Wednesday at 6 p.m.

WUC administration has been studying the matter and is expected to make a recommendation to the board, but it’s ultimately city council’s call. I was told the report relies heavily on what the health community recommends, and both the local dental society and the health unit are heavy supporters of continued fluoridation.

But a growing number of citizens, connected and empowered through social media and the Internet, are questioning what they’re told by experts and authorities is best for them. One expert I interviewed for my recent feature on the subject, Paul Connett, a retired professor of environmental chemistry and toxicology with years of delving into the fluoride issue, feels there’s a lot more at stake for the authorities pushing for the fluoride status quo.

“Lose fluoridation and you lose credibility, lose credibility and you lose the public’s trust — maybe they’re not protecting fluoridation, maybe they’re protecting vaccinations,” said Paul. Remember how nervous the health authorities became when growing numbers of parents began questioning why it was so important to artificially innoculate their kids to fend off the winter flu?

“They’re scared stiff of admitting they got it wrong,” said Paul.

Expect local medical officer of health Dr. Allen Heimann — who, like me, is neither a toxicologist, an epidemiologist or a scientist — to come armed with experts and reassuring documents. Health unit board chairman Gary McNamara, mayor of Tecumseh — which has some say on the matter because both Tecumseh and LaSalle consume about a fifth of WUC’s water — recently suggested a referendum (just what i want — my neighbors voting on whether or not i get medicine).

I agree with WUC chairman and city councillor Bill Marra when he says it’s a difficult subject for the layman. Researching my story, for every good point from one side came an equally compelling counterpoint from the other side.

But in good science and good public health, there’s a thing called the precautionary principle — if there’s any doubt or question, THEN DON’T DO IT. If we were simply guided by years or decades of past behavior, we’d still have mercury tooth fillings killing our brains or asbestos-lined homes and brake pads ravaging our lungs.

Mayor Eddie Francis, whom I’m told holds some sway on WUC and council, told me he’d be quite satisfied to see fluoridation end in Windsor, so there’s a beachhead for the opposition. (Eddie’s cornered on this one — his wife, who runs a wellness centre,  is a chiropractor, whose professional body is opposed to fluoridation).

It’s not a big money matter, with WUC spending under $150,000 a year on fluoride. That money could be used to top up existing health unit programs targeting dental health care for lower income families (who tend not to have a choice on whether their kids fluoridate or not).

By the way, it’s not really fluoride that’s used in Windsor and most other municipal water systems — it’s fluorosilicic acid, which is a toxic waste byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer manufacturing process. At about the same time as government agencies decided to ban the stuff from being released into the environment, industry was able to convince municipalities that it was just as effective and way cheaper than the pharmaceutical grade stuff they had been using to fight cavities (there are so many cool stories related to this topic — years from now, our grandchildren will be either horrified at us or laughing in stitches).

It’s an important issue — that’s why each speaker at Wednesday’s special WUC meeting gets five minutes to make their case.

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/02/27/more-doctors-smoke-camels/

Fluoride battle brews in Orillia, Ontario

 

Dr. Paul Connett, who spent 16 years studying the impact of water fluoridation, said there is mounting evidence that ingesting fluoride can cause a range of problems, including damage to the brain, kidneys, teeth, and bones.

By: Frank Matys, Simcoe.com, Orillia, Ontario 23-Feb-2012 — Orillia City councillors had a duty to attend a presentation on the potential dangers of fluoridation as Orillia considers adding the chemical to the water supply, says an opponent of the proposal.

Just three of nine council members were present at a well-attended talk by Dr. Paul Connett, said organizer Susan Schweitzer.

“It is very important that they would have been there, it is too important an issue not to,” said Schweitzer, a member of Orillia Citizens Against Fluoride.

Seventy-five people attended the presentation by Connett at Lakehead University Friday evening, held in advance of a Feb. 29 public meeting organized by the city.

Connett, who spent 16 years studying the impact of water fluoridation, said there was mounting evidence that ingesting fluoride can cause a range of problems, including damage to the brain, kidneys, teeth, and bones.

“No government has the right to force medication on its people,” he said.

During a presentation that lasted more than two hours, the retired professor urged city council not to follow the health unit’s recommendation to fluoridate the water supply.

“Only do this if you are absolutely convinced that this is completely safe and effective,” he added. “If you are not convinced, if you can’t yourself demonstrate where it says it is, where the evidence is for that, then it is a reckless decision to take.”

Addressing the argument that the amount of fluoride added to water is miniscule, and therefore no cause for worry, Connett noted the dosage cannot be controlled as health officials have no way of monitoring the quantity of water individual residents consume.

Some are more sensitive to its effects than others, he said.

“You can’t control who gets the medicine,” he added. “It goes to everybody.”

Swallowing fluoride provides little or no benefit to teeth, he said.

According to Schweitzer, all council members were made aware of the meeting and were encouraged to attend.

Councillors Linda Murray, Patrick Kehoe and Paul Spears attended.

While acknowledging the meeting was hastily arranged with little time for notice, Schweitzer said councillors should have made the effort to hear Connett’s concerns.

“Given the health risks involved in fluoridating the water, if you want to go on the ‘yes’ side, you are saying you want to play Russian roulette with the health of Orillians,” she added. “You would have to be an unreasonable person to pull that trigger.”

Medical officers of health who recommend fluoridation “are simply rubberstamping the official position of Health Canada,” Connett said.

He argued against several points in a letter from local Medical Officer of Health Dr. Charles Gardner, including the claim that fluoride was a safe and effective measure to fight tooth decay.

A claim by Gardner that opponents of fluoridation are “a small but very vocal minority” is “a typical industrial propaganda trick,” Connett claimed.

“If I’m paying $300,000 for this guy’s salary to give the council objective information on a controversial issue, I wouldn’t be satisfied with these kind of statements,” he said.

Gardner, a public health and preventive medicine specialist who worked as a family doctor for five years, considers himself qualified to recommend fluoridation.

“You need strong leadership and you need highly educated, well-informed and well-skilled leadership to be able to do that,” he said. “I feel that I have that, I feel my colleagues have that.”

The health unit is “well supported by a range of health professionals who have the skills to help us do that,” he added.

Gardner alleged Connett, in his book, “selectively chooses the evidence to support (anti-fluoridation)” without considering the larger body of scientific evidence.

The dosage of fluoride ingested by residents is taken into account through reviews of the quantity of water people consume, both as an average and on the extreme end of the spectrum, he said.

Other sources of fluoride, such as diet and toothpaste, are also considered, Gardner said.

The health unit does not take statements from Health Canada and other authorities supporting fluoridation at face value, but does “listen” to those bodies, he added.

“They follow methods that we would support,” he said, adding those organizations seek out and review “high quality” research on the issue.

Gardner acknowledged the issues surrounding fluoridation are highly technical, and said it was the health unit’s job to “convey this in a way that everybody can understand.

“To cut through the technical detail and to bring forward conclusions that are supportive of the technical detail but are clear with everyday language,” he said.

City council will ultimately decide on whether to fluoridate the drinking supply, he added.

“I’m a great believer in democracy,” he added. “I think that such policy changes have to be made by elected officials.”

Schweitzer said she had been inundated with calls from residents concerned over the proposal, and has started a petition urging the city to reject the idea.

“There is a lot of public outcry,” she said. “My day is filled with calls now.”

Schweitzer said Mayor Angelo Orsi contacted her after the meeting to say he was unable to attend due to prior commitments, as did Coun. Andrew Hill.

Coun. Linda Murray found Connett’s presentation interesting and educational, but took issue with his referencing the Nuremberg Principles to illustrate a point about governments experimenting on a population without consent.

Coun. Michael Fogarty was unable to attend due to a scheduling conflict.

Fogarty told Orillia Today he was “willing to listen” to concerns over fluoridation, “just as I am willing to listen to the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit and Dr. Charles

Gardner and others who say it is not only safe, but a social benefit that reaches past just oral health.”

Connett, the co-author of ‘The Case Against Fluoride,’ said he has yet to receive a response from the scientific community since it was published more than a year ago.

http://www.simcoe.com/news/article/1303553–fluoride-battle-brews

 

Researchers explore fluoride debate

Water-Glass-Grass-COF-COF-350-x-350By: Doug Schmidt, The Windsor Star, Windsor, Ontario 18-Feb-2012 — Epidemiological researchers with the Windsor-Essex County Health Unit  have descended on Kingsville and Leamington to stare into the mouths of  locals and figure out whether their teeth are fouler than those found in Windsor.

The study, started last year, aims to measure the touted benefits of fighting cavities by adding fluoride into the municipal water supply, something the Windsor Utilities Commission has been doing in the city for 60 years, but something the Union Water System serving those county towns has never done.

It’s also an effort by local authorities to counter a recent surge in public opposition to the long-practised public health measure.

“We’ll try to see if we can get enough information on dental caries (tooth decay)… to accurately look at a comparison between fluoridation and non-fluoridation,” said local medical officer of health Dr. Allen Heimann.

Depending on the outcome, the study will no doubt be added to the arsenal of one or the other side in the renewed local debate over whether adding the chemical to our drinking water is beneficial.

Federal health regulators have left the decision on fluoridation to each municipality, and WUC staff have been conducting their own fact-finding review. Chief operating officer John Stuart said a report being prepared for the board will rely heavily on the input of health officials. For his part, Heimann said he remains convinced that fluoridation is the way to go.

But with a growing local campaign against fluoridation, Windsor’s politicians will soon be asked to play doctor and decide whether to join other North American municipalities that have decided to end the practice.

A special meeting of WUC is being hosted at 6 p.m. Feb. 29 at city hall. The commission will forward its recommendation to city council, but a decision won’t come
easy.

“There are counter-arguments for every argument that one side or the other brings forward — that’s what’s going to make it so difficult,” said Coun. Bill Marra, who chairs the WUC board.

“Interest from the community is growing … it’s a good time for the facts.”

Formed last summer, Fluoride Free Windsor boasts about 200 supporters, and Marra said he and other city decision makers are being lobbied to pull the plug on fluoridation, viewed historically as a relatively cheap method of strengthening teeth and reducing the incidence of cavities in children.

In recent months, the group was successful in getting Lakeshore and Amherstburg councils to vote to end fluoridation, and politicians in both Tecumseh and LaSalle expressed concerns but decided to defer any decisions pending more information. The Windsor-Essex County Environment Committee is recommending Windsor consider ending fluoridation of its tap water.

“We are not the gullible people in the 1950s when they introduced this,” said Fluoride Free Windsor founding member Donna Mayne, a Windsor mother of three. When health officials point to the incidence of cavities going down in communities that fluoridate their water, Mayne and other opponents point to the same results of declining rates of tooth decay in places that don’t have municipal water fluoridation, including most of Quebec, B.C. and Europe. Fluoride in toothpastes, nylon toothbrushes, better nutrition and increased public awareness leading to better oral hygiene have all made a difference, they argue.

Kim DeYong, a Windsor mother of two and original member of the group, doesn’t like the municipal water system being used as a delivery vehicle for a chemical that is not required to treat the water. She said the dosage of this “medicine” is random and unmonitored, whether the recipient is a child, athlete, senior or diabetic. “When my daughter is thirstier … she gets more medication,” said DeYong. Because of its fluoride content, users of toothpaste are told not to swallow, “but we swallow the water,” she added.

Heimann said that, while “there have been a lot of claims on the dangers of fluoridation,” the list of proponents who can cite studies and reviews pointing to the benefits is lengthy, including the Canadian and American governments and professional health and dental organizations and the World Health Organization. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ranked tap water fluoridation as one of the top 10 public health achievements of the 20th century.

Asked whether he harbours any concerns about its continued use, Heimann responded: “Not at this time.”

The medical officer of health’s opinion holds sway.

“I’m not an epidemiologist, I’m not a doctor — I sort of rely on the health professionals,” said Stuart, who is leading WUC’s review effort.

But Lakeshore and Amherstburg’s decision to stop fluoridation came over Heimann’s protests, and both towns join a growing number of Canadian municipalities, including, most recently, Waterloo, Moncton and Calgary, which have sided with the critics and ended the practice. Heimann points to cities like London, Hamilton and Toronto, which also recently reviewed the matter before choosing to stay with fluoridation.

Marra isn’t alone in finding the issue complicated and the advice conflicting. Consider some examples:

The Canadian and Ontario dental associations are big supporters, but the head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto, Dr. Hardy Limeback, is one of the prominent dissenters and says adding fluoride to drinking water is “more harmful than beneficial.” He claims the early studies still cited by authorities were “not done very well,” and the more recent studies show little difference when comparing systems that use fluoridation to those that don’t.

Proponents like the local health unit cite Health Canada claims of substantially higher cavity rates among children in Quebec, where there is almost no fluoridation, compared to Ontario, where the majority of the population drinks fluoridated tap water. Opponents, however, can point to Statistics Canada figures from the same two jurisdictions indicating there was only a slight difference, amounting to about half a cavity per child.

Health Canada says infant formula prepared with fluoridated water “maximizes the protective role of fluoride” on future permanent teeth, while the CDCP and the American Dental Association, both strong proponents of fluoridation, caution against giving fluoridated water to infants.

The U.S. CDC may herald municipal fluoridation as one of the top public health achievements of the past century, but one of its own studies in 2010 concluded that more than 40 per cent of adolescents aged 12 to 15 studied had suffered dental fluorosis, which causes spotting on teeth and is a sign the individual is getting too much fluoride. Health Canada, citing data released that same year by the Canadian Health Measures Survey, claims the prevalence of fluorosis in Canada is too low to even be worth reporting.

“That’s ridiculous … we should not expect the 49th parallel to protect Canada from dental fluorosis,” said Dr. James Beck, professor emeritus of medical biophysics at the University of Calgary. A doctor of medicine, he helped convince Calgary council to vote a little over a year ago to stop fluoridation for a million residents.

DeYong said the public was never informed when the pharmaceutical-grade sodium fluoride originally used in the 1950s — and which was used in the health and safety tests — was replaced a decade later by cheaper industrial-grade hydrofluorosilicic acid, which is sourced from the smokestack scrubbers of phosphate fertilizer manufacturing plants.

Mayne accuses Health Canada of “doublespeak” when it says hydrofluorosilicic acid is safe when used in our drinking and bathing water, while other government regulations make it illegal for factories to release that same material into the environment as a byproduct of the fertilizer manufacturing process. “Why can’t these industries dump their scrubber waste into our lakes?” asks Mayne, who has also learned the hydrofluorosilicic acid sourced from factory scrubbers contains such trace contaminants as lead and mercury.

“Even pharmaceutical grade has trace contaminants,” said WUC’s Stuart. “We follow all the regulations,” he added.

“The  very few who really look into this are horrified. It’s all endorsements and propaganda — there’s no science,” said Heather Gingerich, a medical geologist who studies fluoride toxicity.

At a recent presentation to Amherstburg, Heimann advised that there is “no credible evidence of toxicity” when fluorosilicic acid is dissolved in water. But fluorosilicic acid, the industrial-grade fluoride put into Windsor’s tap water, has never been put to the test by being made the subject of toxicological studies involving either animals or humans, said Gingerich, who is the Canadian director of the International Medical Geology Association.

“There is no question that fluoride damages human health. The weight of evidence is tilting more and more against fluoridation,” said Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network and a retired professor of environmental chemistry and toxicology at New York’s St. Lawrence University.

The protective action of fluoride comes from its direct contact with the surfaces of the teeth (a chemical, not biological process), and yet it’s being swallowed and ingested through our drinking water and absorbed through the skin while bathing or showering, Connett and other critics say. The same chemical reaction that hardens tooth enamel is hardening bones, leading to increased brittleness and greater susceptibility to bone fractures later in life. Thyroid function can be affected and some studies show an impact on child IQ levels at higher dosages.

“It interferes with all sorts of things in the body … it doesn’t make sense to expose every tissue in the body,” said Connett, co-author of the 2010 book The Case Against Fluoride. Heimann said the fluoride added to drinking water is not a medicine, but Connett said the reason for its introduction is “to combat tooth decay — that’s the definition of a medicine.”

Health Canada was asked to provide an expert for an interview but its media office told The Star it would only respond to written questions.

“Health Canada’s review of the existing scientific literature on fluoride has found no adverse health effects from water containing fluoride at, or below, (the) maximum acceptable concentration,” it replied to a question on potential human health risks. The agency’s suggested “optimal” concentration in drinking water is 0.7 milligrams per litre. Stuart said WUC’s target level is 0.65 mg/L.

“Currently available studies indicates (sic) there is no link between any adverse health effects and exposure to fluoride in drinking water at levels that are below the maximum acceptable concentration of 1.5 mg/L,” Health Canada told The Star in its email response.

Those “available studies” now appear inadequate to some. Earlier this month, Peel Regional Council, representing 1.3 million Greater Toronto residents, petitioned Ontario’s health minister to help push Health Canada to begin regulating industry-sourced fluorosilicates as drugs under the Food and Drugs Act.

It also wants Health Canada to “reassure the citizens of Peel” that what’s being added to their drinking water is safe.

Alberta’s Beck said it took a decade-long effort to convince Calgary to end its fluoridation. In the end, he said, it wasn’t the scientific arguments about the effectiveness of putting fluoride in the drinking system to prevent cavities or about its toxicity and the potential dangers to human health that won the day. Rather it was the ethical issue over using something as essential as drinking water as a means to deliver a chemical with only an “extremely slight benefit” in preventing cavities.

“One councillor told me later that council felt itself overwhelmed by the scientific questions — but they were convinced by the ethical question,” said Beck. He said fluoride is the only medicine administered without the informed consent of the recipient, there’s no initial or ongoing monitoring by a physician, and the only way you can stop taking it is by not using the municipal water system.

The Essex County Dental Society has warned that tooth decay will increase if fluoride is taken out of the water. Gingerich, who lives in Ingersoll and is providing her support to the local anti-fluoride group, said fluoride can be found in the air, water, food and pharmaceuticals.

“We’re now exposed to five times more in our environment than in 1971 when I was born,” she said.

On an operating budget of about $50 million, WUC’s annual fluoridation costs are between $100,000 and $150,000. “It’s not going to make or break our budget,” said WUC’s Stuart. Agreements with Windsor’s neighbours see just over a fifth of WUC’s drinking water volume going to LaSalle and Tecumseh, so “it’s not just Windsor … they’d also need to pass bylaws,” he added.

The issue must ultimately be decided by city council. “People today are more and more aware of the things they ingest and where they come from — I’m open-minded,” said Mayor Eddie Francis.

As with mercury in dental fillings and lead in gasoline before, the Fluoride Action Network’s Connett predicts fluoridation of municipal drinking water will eventually cease.

“Yes, eventually good science prevails,” he said.

http://www.windsorstar.com/news/Researchers+explore+fluoride+debate/6171891/story.html#ixzz1mmTtWMD9

Orillia citizens show up to hear water-fluoridation critic

Dr. Paul Connett, PhD - Speaking out against water fluoridation.

By: Robin MacLennan, Special to The Packet & Times – Orillia, Ontario 17-Feb-2012 — Local governments are doing to everyone what a doctor can do to no one, says Paul Connett, an international speaker and opponent of fluoridation.

Connett visited Orillia Friday and delivered strong warnings to an audience of about 60 people at Lakehead University about the dangers of adding fluoride to public drinking water.

“Local governments can choose to put fluoride into everyone’s water or allow people to apply it themselves using fluoridated toothpastes,” he said in an interview prior to his presentation. “The first approach exposes every tissue of the body to a toxic substance and the second approach avoids that and also avoids forcing it upon people who don’t want it.”

The public meeting was organized by citizens concerned that city council is considering adding fluoride to drinking water in an attempt to combat tooth decay.

Connett, who holds a PhD in chemistry, said there are two fundamental scientific questions on water fluoridation: Does it work? Is it safe? The answer to both is no, he said, using a tube of toothpaste to back up his claim.

A pea-sized drop of toothpaste contains about the same amount of fluoride as a large glass of water, he said, showing a toothpaste label warning against swallowing the product.

Connett has been speaking out against fluoridation for more than 16 years, starting in his hometown and spreading around the world.

“It has been a very frustrating experience that has changed my notion that I was living in a rational world where people respected science,” he said. “For Health Canada, it’s more important to protect this (fluoridated water) program than it is to protect the health of the people.”

Local municipal politicians are often intimidated by dentists and other professionals who support adding fluoride to local drinking water, he said.

“They are taught at school that people against this are all a bunch of loony-tunes,” he said. “But we know it makes no sense to swallow it and it makes even less sense to put fluoride into drinking water when fluoridated toothpaste is available to everyone.”

Drinking treated water exposes internal organs to an unnecessary toxic chemical that “violates nature’s own guidelines.”

“This is a terrible medical practice and a most unusual medical practice that should never have been started,” he said. “It is the only time we use the public water system to deliver medication to individuals.”

He backed up his theory with the example of a baby being fed formula receiving 175 times more fluoride than a breast-fed infant.

“That defies common sense. There is not a single process in the body that needs fluoride…”

He used Calgary and Waterloo as examples of communities that heard his message and removed fluoride from drinking water recently.

“Fluoride met its Waterloo in Waterloo and also in Calgary,” he said. “Over two million people have been freed from fluoride in the past 14 months. Let’s hope it (fluoridation) doesn’t happen in Orillia.”

http://www.orilliapacket.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3476027#.Tz-OuZziS3o.email

Council agrees to keep Amherstburg fluoride free

By: Karen Fallon, Amherstburg River Town Times, Ontario 07-Feb-2012 — Amherstburg’s water will be fluoride-free a bit longer.

Councillor John Sutton said the town has not been putting fluoride in the water since last April, pending improvements to the treatment system.

Last night, council voted to keep it that way – for now.

Sutton said if there’s a great public outcry that people want it, the issue will be re-visited.

“There’s certainly wonderful positions on each side,” he said. “You try to ascertain what the best course is to take as you’re looking at the issue, but I think we’re making the right decision at this time.”

Sutton said council took the position to determine the best decision for all involved.

“Council took the opportunity to say let’s take a moratorium right now discontinue the provision of fluoride in our water until such time as we can ascertain that it’s safe to do so for our residents,” he said. “At the same time, we want to protect our employees as well in terms of their handling of it which I’m confident we are.”

The Windsor Utilities Commission is also studying whether to continue adding fluoride to the city’s drinking water.

http://www.rivertowntimes.com/?p=2173

Fluoride to be kept out of Amherstburg drinking water

CBC News, Windsor (Amherstburg), Ontario 07-Feb-2012 — Amherstburg’s water will be fluoride-free a bit longer.

Councillor John Sutton said the town has not been putting fluoride in the water since last April, pending improvements to the treatment system.

Last night, council voted to keep it that way – for now.

Sutton said if there’s a great public outcry that people want it, the issue will be re-visited.

“There’s certainly wonderful positions on each side,” he said. “You try to ascertain what the best course is to take as you’re looking at the issue, but I think we’re making the right decision at this time.”

Sutton said council took the position to determine the best decision for all involved.

“Council took the opportunity to say let’s take a moratorium right now discontinue the provision of fluoride in our water until such time as we can ascertain that it’s safe to do so for our residents,” he said. “At the same time, we want to protect our employees as well in terms of their handling of it which I’m confident we are.”

The Windsor Utilities Commission is also studying whether to continue adding fluoride to the city’s drinking water.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/story/2012/02/07/wdr-fluoride-drinking-water-amherstburg.html

Town council passes moratorium on putting artificial fluoridation into drinking water – Town had suspended artificial fluoridation last April

By: Ron Giofu, The Amherstburg Echo, Ontario 07-Feb-2012 — Artificial fluoridation will stay out of Amherstburg’s drinking water after town council passed a moratorium against adding fluoride Monday night.

Town council was unanimous in passing a motion put forward by Councillor Carolyn Davies that called for the moratorium to be put into place. Her motion read “that a moratorium be put on future purchase and installation of new municipal water fluoridation equipment and future purchase and use of fluoridation chemical known as hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) containing silicofluoride and further that administration be directed to request from government jurisdictions including Health Canada, the Ontario Ministries of Labour and Environment, evidence ensuring that town employees and any others working with the hydrofluorosilicic acid process are not put in harm’s way, as required by the Ontario Health and Safety Act (1990).”

Fluoride is the legal and financial responsibility of municipal governments, said Davies and more information is now available than when fluoride was first introduced roughly 60 years ago.

“I think we’ve heard more peer reviews and scientific reviews that didn’t exist in the ‘40s or the ‘50s,” she said.

The town had already suspended artificial water fluoridation last April awaiting information on upgrades and repairs to the system and methodology in providing fluoridation. That information was to be provided by the town’s consultants CH2M Hill. However, Davies said with her motion now passed, the purchase of any equipment and any subsequent information becomes “a moot point” with the town not wanting fluoride re-introduced.

“Why spend taxpayers’ money on something that has proven evidence of human harm?” she asked.

Davies added she is confident there will be no evidence to the contrary to come forth proving there is are no safety risks to adding fluoride to drinking water.

“I think we should go through with it,” said Councillor Bart DiPasquale of the moratorium. “Other communities have done it. Let’s go through with it and move on.”

Kimberly DeYong of Fluoride Free Windsor and Heather Gingerich, director of the International Medical Geology Association, told council of their research in respect to potential risks fluoride poses to both human health and environment.

DeYong said Amherstburg was the only town not served by the Windsor Utilities Commission to still use fluoride in its water. She added that 13 Canadian municipalities in the last 15 months decided to stop putting fluoride in drinking water.

“Our water is something that should be pure. It should not be used to deliver medication,” said DeYong.

Gingerich recommended that council not resume artificial fluoridation, noting that it would comply with environmental regulations, protect people including the unborn and elderly and allow provincial public health care dollars to be targeted in other ways. She noted that people begin to show negative impacts in the third generation of exposure.

Several local residents also urged council to eliminate artificial fluoridation.

“As a private resident, I would like to be able to be confident that the water we are drinking is water,” said Lorene Clayton.

If water is fluoridated, she said people couldn’t even make soup without being exposed.

“I’d love to be able to make that choice,” she said, of being able to choose water that hasn’t been fluoridated.

“I would like to urge council to take the time and review what has been presented tonight,” said Pat Andrews. “I’d like to be able to drink water that is just water.”

Christine Moody quoted from a Nov. 15, 2011 letter by Dr. Hardy Limeback, professor and head of preventive dentistry at the University of Toronto.

The letter read, in part, that Limeback has “personally conducted years of funded research at the University of Toronto on the topic of fluorosis (fluoride poisoning) and bone effects of fluoride intake. A bone study, for which we received national funding, comparing hip bones of people who live in Toronto (fluoridated since 1963) to the bones of people from Montreal (Montreal has never been fluoridated) suggests disturbing negative changes in the bone quality of Torontonians. This is not good.”

Limebeck’s letter also stated that fluoride has not been shown to be safe and effective and that the pendulum is shifting to where fluoride is being considered “not safe, and no longer effective.”

http://www.amherstburgecho.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3462600

Fluorosis – caused by Water Fluoridation – is Collateral Damage

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Water fluoridation controversy continues in Waterloo

COF-COF News Find 300 x 300By: CTV News Kitchener, Kitchener, Ontario  05-Feb-2012 – Controversy continues over the referendum on water fluoridation in Waterloo.

Charges were filed against the Ontario Dental Association and two dentists under the Ontario Elections Act.

It is alleged they broke the rules by campaigning in favour of fluoride without having registered to do so.

The issue is expected to head to court on Monday.

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/water-fluoridation-controversy-continues-in-waterloo-1.764055