March 21, 2019

Archives for November 2016

Groups Urge EPA to Ban Fluoridation Based on Risk to Brain

COF-COF Special News Find 300 x 300PRNewswire, Press Release Provided By Fluoride Action Network, United States 30-Nov-2016 – A coalition of environmental, medical and health groups have served the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a Petition calling on the Agency to ban the addition of fluoridation chemicals to public water supplies due to the risks these chemicals pose to the brain, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

The Petition, which includes over 2,500 pages of supporting scientific documentation, explains that “the amount of fluoride now regularly consumed by millions of Americans in fluoridated areas exceeds the doses repeatedly linked to IQ loss and other neurotoxic effects.” Signers to the Petition include FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, and Moms Against Fluoridation.

“If EPA applies its own risk assessment guidelines to fluoridation, we believe it will agree that fluoridation poses an unacceptably high risk to the brain,” says attorney Michael Connett, FAN legal adviser.

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorizes EPA to prohibit the “particular use” of a chemical that presents an unreasonable risk to the general public or susceptible subpopulations. TSCA gives EPA the authority to prohibit drinking water additives.

Subpopulations especially vulnerable to fluoride’s neurotoxic effects include infants, the elderly, kidney patients, and the nutrient deficient (e.g. iodine and calcium). Evidence also suggests that African-Americans may suffer disproportionate harm as well.

EPA scientists characterize chemicals with human evidence of neurotoxicity as “gold standard” chemicals warranting assessment priority. Not only is there human research on fluoride neurotoxicity, it is so extensive that fluoride is classified alongside lead, mercury and PCBs as one of only 12 chemicals “known to cause developmental neurotoxicity in human beings.” (Lancet Neurology)

At EPA’s request, the National Research Council (NRC) reviewed fluoride toxicology research and concluded in 2006, “It is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.”

Since NRC’s review, 196 fluoride/brain studies have been published, including 61 human studies.

Contrary to claims that only high doses of fluoride are linked to brain damage, studies of fluoride-exposed human populations consistently find neurotoxic effects at water fluoride levels well below the EPA’s “safe” level (4 mg/L).

One recent study from China found that children ingesting just 1.4 milligrams of fluoride each day suffered a 5-point loss in IQ. Some children living in fluoridated areas in the United States ingest doses comparable to this level.

Research also shows that some Americans have fluoride levels in their urine and blood that equal or exceed the levels linked to cognitive deficits.

“As with lead, fluoride is a neurotoxic and an endocrine disrupting substance that has no place in our drinking water,” Connett states. “The EPA should follow Europe’s lead and end fluoridation.”

EPA has 90 days to respond to the Petition.


York professor leads study that could help answer fluoride safety questions

COF-COF Special News Find 300 x 300By: YFile, York University, Toronto, Ontario 25-Nov-2016 – A $300,000 grant from the National Institute of Health (NIH) will allow York University to lead the largest study to date that investigates whether early life exposure to low level fluoride affects the developing brain.

Faculty of Health Professor Christine Till, principal investigator of the study, will use the funding to determine if prenatal and childhood exposure to fluoride impacts learning abilities and behavioural problems in young Canadian children.

Previous studies led by Till and former PhD student, Ashley Malin, indicate that fluoride in tap water is associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents. Findings were determined using information collected by the National Survey of Children’s Health as well as the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the U.S.

This two-year study, however, will access data from a Canadian pregnancy cohort, Maternal Infant Research on Environmental Contaminants (MIREC), to determine whether or not there is a link.

The research team consists of scientists from complementary fields spanning environmental health (Professor Lanphear, Simon Fraser University; Professor Muckle, Universite Laval), dentistry (Dr. Martinez-Mier, Indiana University), toxicology (Professor Ayotte, University of Montreal), and environmental epidemiology (Professor Hornung, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital).

“Our study employs a prospective design that includes biomarkers of exposure to fluoride, detailed assessment of potential confounders, a comparison group, and the use of sensitive cognitive and behavioural measures that have been collected in one of the world’s most comprehensively characterized national pregnancy cohorts (MIREC),” said Till.

Fluoride concentrations will be measured using urine samples obtained in each trimester from a sample of 1,960 pregnant women living in 10 large Canadian cities – half of which add fluoride to municipal water.

The children born to these women have been followed since infancy and underwent cognitive testing between the ages of 3 and 4 years.

The study will also examine whether neuro-developmental outcomes differ among children who ingested infant formula using fluoridated versus non-fluoridated water. It will also examine whether serial urinary fluoride concentrations in pregnant women are higher in women who live in communities that fluoridate their municipal drinking water.

“We are doing this research because it addresses a topic of great public health relevance for both Canada and the United States where community water fluoridation is a widespread practice. Scientific advisory boards, including the National Toxicology Program, conclude that there is insufficient laboratory evidence to support or refute the likelihood of fluoride neurotoxicology. We need high quality data to address this gap in knowledge,” said Till.

“Results of the study will have the potential to strengthen environmental health risk assessments related to water fluoridation and inform policy decisions about the safety of vulnerable populations, including young children and pregnant women, consuming fluoridated water.”

She describes the research as a “win-win” situation, where both potential outcomes will provide valuable information in the hotly contested fluoride issue.


Something in the Water – Does adding fluoride put you at risk?

Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows

Water Fluoridation Linked to Higher ADHD Rates

Fluoride in tap water associated with ADHD in children, researchers find

Malin and Till, Exposure to fluoridated water and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States: an ecological association, Environmental Health

Fluoride foes protest after staff tell Peel that water treatment is safe

COF-COF Special News Find 300 x 300By: Roger Belgrave, Brampton Guardian, Region of Peel, Ontario 24-Nov-2016 – Peel’s Medical Officer of Health told a committee reviewing the use of fluoride in the region’s drinking water that there is no “quality” or “relevant” research to suggest the longtime practice poses a health risk when Health Canada standards are followed.

Dr. Eileen de Villa spoke to the region’s Community Water Fluoridation Committee Nov. 24 to present staff findings from a review of studies on the effectiveness and safety of community water fluoridation.

De Villa brought two thick binders filled with studies to the meeting — illustrating the vast library of research material produced worldwide on the health effects of fluoride in drinking water.

She noted the volumes of available data vary in quality and relevance to the situation in Peel, where fluoride is added to municipal water under strict government guidelines and at low levels.

De Villa attempted to respond to a number of concerns raised during this process initiated earlier this year to produce a recommendation to council on whether the region should continue water fluoridation.

Concerns about the region’s fluoridated water causing fluorosis are not supported by evidence that show rates of moderate to severe cases are “so low that they cannot even be reported,” she said.

Associate Medical Officer of Health Dr. Lawrence Loh was also on hand to support De Villa’s insistence that the type of fluoride and the amount added to local drinking water is safe for public consumption.

Loh told committee members there is no evidence to indicate a link between adverse health and fluoride added to drinking water at the “optimal” level recommended by Health Canada.

De Villa added that dentists in jurisdictions where fluoride has been removed from the water are beginning to report increased incidents to tooth decay.

This report from the regional health officials came as no surprise from anti-fluoride lobbyists, who have accused De Villa and her staff of bias during this process and dismissing research that has concluded water fluoridation is essentially poisoning the public.

A handful of fluoride opponents were in council chambers to hear the presentation — two were dressed in yellow HAZMAT suits.

“There’s an information war on fluoride,” said Richard Allan, who explained he was wearing the type of suit workers at water treatment plants must wear when dealing with fluoride.

A larger group staged a protest outside the Peel Centre Drive regional headquarters after the meeting.

The demonstration was organized by Mississauga resident Liesa Cianchino, who launched the ongoing court challenge against the region and provincial government two years ago to stop water fluoridation in Peel.

Cianchino claimed the Fluoridation Act and Peel Region are violating charter rights and the region’s artificial water fluoridation program violates the Safe Drinking Water Act and Food and Drugs Act.

In statements of defence filed in February 2015, the region and provincial government deny the dangers of artificial water fluoridation and maintain that fluoride at the safe levels maintained in Ontario has proven health benefits.

Both the province and region are calling for dismissal of the court challenge.

Fluoration: Châteauguay garde le dossier ouvert / Fluoridation: Châteauguay keeps the file open

Trouvailles Médiatiques 300 x 300Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 22 novembre 2016 – Châteauguay, qui a d’ailleurs consulté ses citoyens à ce sujet au début de l’année 2016, admet que le dossier est loin d’être fermé et mise beaucoup sur l’étude du Dr Christian Caron, commandée par la Santé publique, afin de prendre une décision éclairée sur la poursuite ou non du programme.

La mairesse de Châteauguay, Nathalie Simon, a accueilli positivement la décision de la Santé publique de lancer cette vaste étude à Châteauguay, Trois-Rivières et Shawinigan, afin d’obtenir des réponses plus claires sur la réelle efficacité de la fluoration.

La Ville avait d’ailleurs mené une consultation publique au début de l’année 2016, avec des représentants de la Santé publique, mais également des intervenants s’opposant à la fluoration, afin de permettre aux citoyens d’avoir les deux côtés de la médaille. Par la suite, un sondage Léger Marketing mené dans la population de la ville avait révélé que 65 % étaient en faveur du maintien de la fluoration.

«Le sondage nous a démontré que la population a suivi le débat et que la majorité est en faveur. Mais le devoir premier de la Santé publique est de nous donner l’heure juste sur la réelle efficacité de la mesure. Lors des consultations, ce sont des données américaines d’il y a quelques années qui ont été présentées aux citoyens. Mais peut-on savoir ce qu’il en est chez nous, ce qu’il en est à l’heure actuelle», se questionne la mairesse Simon.

Cette dernière semblait d’ailleurs partager en partie l’avis du maire Yves Lévesque, qui reprochait à la Santé publique d’avoir manqué de leadership pour cette mesure dont elle prône les bienfaits.

«Jusqu’à la mise en place de l’étude, la Santé publique n’avait pas été très proactive. Si c’est une mesure de santé publique efficace, comment se fait-il qu’il y ait de moins en moins de villes qui fluorent leur eau? Comment peut-on les appuyer dans leurs démarches s’ils ne nous fournissent pas les outils pour appuyer leur position», indique Mme Simon.

La mairesse de Châteauguay se dit maintenant consciente qu’avec l’abandon de Trois-Rivières, le focus pourrait bien se transposer sur Châteauguay comme porte-étendard de la fluoration au Québec.

«On va attendre. On veut avoir les chiffres. Abandonner pour abandonner, ce n’est pas une option surtout quand la population se dit en faveur. On ne veut pas prendre une décision émotive, on veut la prendre basée sur des chiffres réels», signale-t-elle.

Outre Châteauguay, rappelons que Dorval, Lévis (secteur Saint-Romuald), Pointe-Claire et Saint-Georges-de-Beauce sont les seules villes au Québec à toujours fluorer l’eu potable, pour un total d’un peu moins de 145 000 citoyens au Québec.


Paule Vermot-Desroches, The Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), November 22, 2016 –

Châteauguay, who consulted its citizens on this issue in early 2016, admits that the dossier is far from being closed and relies heavily on the study of Dr. Christian Caron, commissioned by Public Health, to to make an informed decision on whether or not to pursue the program.

The mayor of Chateauguay, Nathalie Simon, welcomed the public health decision to launch this vast study at Châteauguay, Trois-Rivières and Shawinigan, in order to obtain clearer answers on the real effectiveness of fluoridation.

The City held a public consultation in early 2016, with representatives from Public Health, and also stakeholders opposing fluoridation, in order to allow citizens to have both sides of the matter. Subsequently, a Léger Marketing poll conducted across the city’s population revealed that 65% were in favor of maintaining fluoridation.

“The survey has shown that the public has followed the debate and that the majority is in favor. But the primary duty of public health is to give us the current actual effectiveness of the measure. During the consultations, American data from a few years ago were presented to the citizens. But can we know what it is with us, what it is at the moment, “questions the Mayor Simon.

The latter seemed to share in part the opinion of Mayor Yves Lévesque, who criticized Public Health for lacking leadership for this measure whose benefits it advocates.

“Until the study was implemented, Public Health had not been very proactive. If it is an effective public health measure, how are fewer and fewer cities fluoridating their water? How can we support them in their efforts if they do not provide us with the tools to support their position, “says Simon.

The mayor of Chateauguay is now aware that with the abandonment of Trois-Rivières, the focus could well be transposed to Châteauguay as standard-bearer of fluoridation in Quebec.

“We will wait. We want the numbers. Abandoning to give up is not an option, especially when the population is in favor. We do not want to make an emotional decision, we want to take it based on real numbers, “she says.

In addition to Châteauguay, Dorval, Lévis (Saint-Romuald sector), Pointe-Claire and Saint-Georges-de-Beauce are the only cities in Quebec to always fluoridate drinking water, for a total of just under 145 000 citizens in Quebec.

Abandon de la fluoration: «Un grand jour pour la démocratie» / Abandonment of fluoridation: “A great day for democracy”

Trouvailles Médiatiques Spéciales 300 x 300Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Les représentants de la Coalition trifluvienne pour une eau très saine (CTETS), qui milite depuis près de sept ans pour l’abandon de la fluoration de l’eau potable à Trois-Rivières, avouent avoir été très surpris lundi matin d’apprendre la soudaine volte-face de la Ville en ce qui concerne la fluoration. La CTETS accueille cette décision comme une immense victoire.

«On tombe en bas de notre chaise. C’est un revirement auquel on ne s’attendait pas, mais c’est aussi un grand jour pour la démocratie. C’est la preuve que l’action citoyenne peut réellement faire une différence quand on décide d’y mettre les efforts», a indiqué Joan Hamel, porte-parole de la CTETS.

Mme Hamel ne peut toutefois pas s’empêcher d’y voir aussi une stratégie électorale de la part du maire, alors que la Coalition avait mis beaucoup de pression sur les conseillers municipaux en faveur de la fluoration.

«Avec le remaniement des districts, deux conseillers pro-fluor allaient partir. Aux prochaines élections, il y aurait eu assurément plus de conseillers contre la fluoration que de conseillers en faveur autour de la table. Avec un nouveau vote, le programme aurait été abandonné de toutes façons. C’est ce qu’on faisait valoir dans nos démarches, que c’était un gaspillage éhonté de fonds publics qui allait forcément finir par être abandonné dès la formation du prochain conseil», rappelle Joan Hamel.

Malgré l’adversité et les nombreuses mésententes publiques entre la CTETS et le maire Yves Lévesque, Joan Hamel a tenu à saluer la décision du premier magistrat. «Je veux le féliciter et le remercier. Ça a été une bataille de plusieurs années et je crois qu’aujourd’hui, c’est toute la population qui est gagnante», signale-t-elle.

Depuis sept ans, la CTETS avait multiplié les démarches pour faire valoir son point, non seulement auprès du conseil municipal, mais aussi de l’ancien conseil, en plus des élus provinciaux, tant les députés locaux que les représentants du ministère de la Santé et du ministère de l’Environnement.

La CTETS était aussi à l’origine d’une pétition réclamant l’abandon de la fluoration et qui a recueilli près de 20 000 signatures à Trois-Rivières.

Lors de la réunion du conseil, lundi soir, la Coalition a fait savoir que son action ne s’arrêterait pas là, mais qu’elle comptait désormais mettre son expertise au service des citoyens d’autres villes qui souhaiteraient voir le programme de fluoration être abandonné.

Par ailleurs, elle veut travailler de concert avec le ministère de la Santé pour mettre de l’avant des mesures de prévention de la carie dentaire qu’elle estime beaucoup plus efficaces et plus ciblées, notamment pour les jeunes enfants dans les milieux scolaires.

Le fil des événements

Juillet 2009

La Ville de Trois-Rivières entame des travaux majeurs à son usine de filtration et cesse la fluoration le temps des travaux.


Février – Le conseil municipal se prononce à 10 voix contre six en faveur de la reprise de la fluoration de l’eau potable une fois les travaux terminés à l’usine de filtration.

Novembre – Un premier contrat de 60 000 $ est octroyé à la firme Pluritec pour la surveillance des travaux d’installation des nouveaux équipements servant à la fluoration de l’eau potable.


Mars – Les conseillères Sylvie Tardif et Françoise Viens demandent un moratoire sur la fluoration de l’eau potable à Trois-Rivières, afin d’attendre les conclusions des travaux de la commission parlementaire.

Avril – L’Assemblée nationale tient une commission parlementaire sur la fluoration de l’eau potable. Elle recommande le maintien du programme mais l’acceptabilité sociale est une condition essentielle.


Février – Dans un vote divisé à neuf contre sept, le conseil municipal dit oui à la reprise de la fluoration.

Octobre – La ville de Richmond abandonne la fluoration de l’eau potable.

Décembre – La ville de La Prairie abandonne elle aussi la fluoration de l’eau potable.

Il ne reste plus que six villes au Québec dont l’eau est fluorée, soit moins de 3 % de la population de la province.


Juin – Le conseiller François Bélisle relance l’idée d’une consultation populaire.

Juillet – La Ville demande au ministère de faire la démonstration que l’acceptabilité sociale est atteinte.


Septembre – La CTETS demande un moratoire d’urgence. La pétition de la CTETS cumule tout près de 18 000 signatures.

21 novembre – La Ville abandonne l’idée de fluorer son eau potable. categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&utm contenuinterne=cyberpresse meme auteur 5043594 article POS3


Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Representatives of the Trois-Rivières Coalition for Very Healthy Water (CTETS), which has been campaigning for nearly seven years to stop the fluoridation of drinking water in Trois-Rivières, say they were very surprised on Monday morning to learn the sudden about-face from the city regarding fluoridation. CTETS welcomes this decision as a huge victory.

“We fell down our chair. It is a reversal that was not expected, but it is also a great day for democracy. This is proof that citizen action can really make a difference when you decide to put an effort into it, “said Joel Hamel, spokesperson for the CTETS.

However, Hamel cannot help but see an electoral strategy on the part of the mayor, while the Coalition put a lot of pressure on the city councilors in favor of fluoridation.

“With the reorganization of the districts, two pro-fluoride advisers were about to leave. In the next election, there would certainly have been more fluoridation counselors than advocates around the table. With a new vote, the program would have been abandoned anyway. That is what we argued in our proceedings, that it was a shameless waste of public funds that would inevitably end up being abandoned as soon as the next council was formed, “recalls Joel Hamel.

Despite the adversity and numerous public disagreements between the CTETS and Mayor Yves Lévesque, Joel Hamel wished to welcome the decision of the first magistrate. “I want to congratulate him and thank him. It has been a battle of many years and I believe that today, the whole population is the winner, “she says.

For the past seven years, CTETS has taken steps to bring its point forward, not only to the municipal council, but also to the former council, in addition to provincial elected representatives, local MPs, representatives from the Ministry of Health and Ministry of the Environment.

The CTETS was also the cause of a petition calling for the abandonment of fluoridation which collected nearly 20,000 signatures in Trois-Rivières.

At the council meeting on Monday evening, the Coalition announced that its action would not stop there, but that it would now put its expertise at the service of the citizens of other cities who would like to see their fluoridation program abandoned.

She also wants to work with the Department of Health to put forward measures to prevent dental caries, which she believes are much more effective and targeted, especially for young children in school settings.


July 2009

The City of Trois-Rivières began major works at its filtration plant and ceased fluoridation during construction.


February – Municipal council voted 10 to 6 in favor of the resumption of fluoridation of drinking water once the work was completed at the filtration plant.

November – A first contract of $ 60,000 is awarded to Pluritec for the supervision of the installation of the new equipment for the fluoridation of drinking water.


March – Councilors Sylvie Tardif and Françoise Viens request a moratorium on the fluoridation of drinking water in Trois-Rivières, in order to await the conclusions of the work of the parliamentary committee.

April – The National Assembly holds a parliamentary committee on the fluoridation of drinking water. She recommended continuing the program but social acceptability was an essential condition.


February – In a vote divided nine to seven, the city council said yes to the resumption of fluoridation.

October – The City of Richmond abandons the fluoridation of drinking water.

December – The town of La Prairie is also abandoning the fluoridation of drinking water.

There are now only six cities in Quebec whose water is fluoridated, less than 3% of the province’s population.


June – Councilor François Bélisle revived the idea of a popular consultation.

July – The City asks the Department to demonstrate that social acceptability has been achieved.


September – The CTETS calls for an emergency moratorium. The CTETS petition has nearly 18,000 signatures.

November 21 – The city abandons the idea of fluoridating its drinking water. categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&utm contenuinterne=cyberpresse meme auteur 5043594 article POS3

Fluoration: Trois-Rivières fait marche arrière / Fluoridation: Trois-Rivières backs out

Trouvailles Médiatiques Spéciales 300 x 300Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Coup de théâtre lundi à l’hôtel de ville de Trois-Rivières, alors que le conseil municipal a finalement décidé de renoncer définitivement à la reprise de la fluoration de l’eau potable.

La Ville, qui avait pourtant entamé depuis un certain temps les démarches pour adhérer de nouveau au programme du ministère de la Santé et qui avait aussi engagé certaines sommes d’argent dans ce programme, laisse tout simplement tomber devant ce que le maire a qualifié de manque de collaboration de la part de la Santé publique.

«Le ministère s’était engagé à prendre les devants dans ce dossier pour renseigner la population et faire la démonstration de l’acceptabilité sociale. Nous avions pris une décision et c’était un dossier très émotif. Mais moi j’ai pris un engagement, et je m’attends aussi à ce que ceux qui s’engagent face à moi respectent leur parole. Or, ça ne s’est jamais fait», déplore Yves Lévesque, visiblement déçu de ce constat.

Rappelons qu’en juillet dernier, le conseil municipal avait adopté une résolution demandant au ministère de «prendre les moyens nécessaires pour consulter les Trifluviens et l’informer que la nécessaire condition de l’acceptabilité sociale a été rencontrée pour la fluoration de son eau potable». En clair, le maire estimait demander à la Santé publique de mieux informer la population sur les bienfaits de la fluoration. Cet effort n’est cependant pas venu, déplore Yves Lévesque.

C’est donc par le biais d’une nouvelle résolution, ajoutée au varia de l’ordre du jour, que le conseil s’est prononcé à l’unanimité sur cet abandon.

«Qu’on décide de fluorer l’eau ou pas, ça ne me défrise pas un cheveux sur la tête. Ce n’est pas un enjeu assez important. Mais notre décision avait été basée sur des faits scientifiques et sur les recommandations du ministère, en qui on a placé notre confiance quand ils nous ont assuré du bien-fondé de la mesure.

Mais à partir de là, c’est au ministère d’être en avant de la parade. La balle était dans leur camp, car je ne peux pas continuer ainsi de me battre quand ce n’est pas à moi de le faire», mentionne le premier magistrat.

Le maire reconnaît que la Santé publique avait mis en place la réalisation d’une étude par le Dr Christian Caron dans une douzaine d’écoles du territoire afin de vérifier les effets bénéfiques de la fluoration, mais croit que c’était trop peu trop tard par rapport à leur engagement, étant donné qu’il aurait fallu plusieurs années avant même de connaître des résultats probants.

Par ailleurs, le maire indique qu’il se devait de prendre rapidement cette décision avant que la Ville n’aille de l’avant avec l’installation complète de tous les équipements liés à la fluoration de l’eau potable, ce qui aurait représenté 1,5 M$.

Le maire estime que la Ville avait à ce jour investi moins de 300 000 $ dans les infrastructures pour la fluoration. «Je devais bouger vite parce que si on avait décidé dans quelques semaines de ne pas procéder, les équipements auraient été installés au complet. Or, pour moi, c’était une condition sine qua non que la Santé publique fasse son bout de chemin, et ils ont eu amplement de temps pour le faire», croit Yves Lévesque.

Selon la directrice générale de la Ville, France Cinq-Mars, les contrats qui ont été octroyés à ce jour pour la fluoration devront faire l’objet de vérifications quant à l’abandon du projet, mais la Ville ne devrait pas être grandement pénalisée, étant donné qu’à l’heure actuelle, les équipements n’avaient pas encore été commandés.

Appelé à réagir à cette nouvelle, le CIUSSS-MCQ, qui chapeaute notamment le département de Santé publique, a indiqué au Nouvelliste ne pas avoir d’information officielle de la Ville concernant la fluoration. Le CIUSSS pourrait réagir mardi.


Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 November 2016 – On Monday, the town hall of Trois-Rivières was hit by a drama, as the city council finally decided to give up definitively the resumption of fluoridation of drinking water.

The City, which had for some time begun the process of re-joining the Ministry of Health program and had also committed sums of money to this program, simply dropped what the mayor described as, “Lack of collaboration on the part of Public Health”.

“The ministry was committed to taking the lead on this issue to inform the public and demonstrate social acceptability. We made a decision and it was a very emotional issue. But I have made a commitment, and I also expect that those who commit themselves to me will respect their word. But this has never happened,” deplores Yves Lévesque, visibly disappointed by this observation.

Let us recall that last July the municipal council passed a resolution requesting the ministry to “take the necessary means to consult the Trifluviens and inform it that the necessary condition of social acceptability has been met for fluoridation of its drinking water “. Clearly, the mayor considered asking Public Health to better inform the population about the benefits of fluoridation. However, this effort did not come, deplores Yves Lévesque.

It was therefore by means of a new resolution, added to the agenda, that the council voted unanimously to abandon fluoridation.

“Whether you decide to fluoridate water or not, it does not break my hair on my head. This is not a big issue. But our decision was based on scientific facts and on the recommendations of the department, which we put our trust in when they assured us of the merits of the measure.

But from there, it’s up to the ministry to be ahead of the parade. The ball was in their camp, because I can not continue fighting when it is not for me to do it,” said the first magistrate.

The mayor acknowledged that Public Health had put in place a study by Dr. Christian Caron in a dozen schools in the territory to verify the beneficial effects of fluoridation, but believed it was too little too late in relation to their commitment, given that it would have taken several years before the results could be known.

In addition, the Mayor indicated that it was his duty to make this decision quickly before the City moved ahead with the complete installation of all equipment related to the fluoridation of drinking water, which would have amounted to $ 1.5 million.

The Mayor estimates that the City has so far invested less than $300,000 in fluoridation infrastructure. “I had to move quickly because if we had decided in a few weeks not to proceed, the equipment would have been installed completely. For me, it was a sine qua non condition that Public Health is doing its bit, and they have had ample time to do it,” believes Yves Lévesque.

According to the City’s Director General, France Cinq-Mars, the contracts awarded to date for fluoridation will have to be checked as to the abandonment of the project, but the City should not be greatly penalized, as the equipment had not yet been ordered.

Called to react to this news, the CIUSSS-MCQ, which oversees the public health department, told the Nouvelliste that it does not have any official city information concerning fluoridation. The CIUSSS could respond on Tuesday.

Abandon de la fluoration: une victoire pour tous / Abandonment of fluoridation: a victory for all

Trouvailles Médiatiques Spéciales 300 x 300Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Pour le conseiller municipal du district Pointe-du-Lac François Bélisle, la décision prise lundi soir par le conseil municipal est une victoire pour tous les citoyens de Trois-Rivières.

M. Bélisle, qui avait demandé en juin dernier à ce que la Ville aille en consultation populaire pour régler la question de l’acceptabilité sociale une fois pour toutes, estime que la décision de Trois-Rivières vient probablement de mettre un terme au programme québécois de fluoration de l’eau potable.

«Ça vient de mettre un sérieux clou dans le cercueil du maintien de ce programme. C’était devenu ridicule car on aurait dit que le combat se faisait à Trois-Rivières pour l’ensemble du Québec, mais ce n’était pas à nous de porter ce combat-là», croit-il.

Pour François Bélisle, il appartenait au ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux d’imposer une telle mesure s’il s’agissait réellement d’un enjeu de santé publique.

«Le ministère n’a jamais voulu mettre ses culottes pour l’imposer. Mais la réalité, c’est que ça ne lève pas. Cet argent pourrait être tellement mieux investi dans d’autres mesures, dans la présence plus importante d’hygiénistes dentaires dans les écoles, dans des mesures préventives pour amener les enfants à se brosser les dents et à adopter de saines habitudes alimentaires», croit François Bélisle.

Sa demande de consultation publique en juin dernier s’était finalement soldée par un compromis demandant au ministère de la Santé de démontrer l’acceptabilité sociale de la mesure, Or, c’est justement cette absence de démonstration aux yeux du maire qui a mis un terme à la mesure et qui a mené à la décision prise lundi soir par le conseil.

Pour François Bélisle, la décision du conseil et du maire démontre une grande écoute du message envoyé par la population. «J’ai le triomphe modeste, mais la raison l’a emporté. Près de 20 000 personnes avaient signé une pétition, ce n’est pas rien. Je suis un élu et je suis là pour servir les citoyens, et ce qui me fait plaisir aujourd’hui, c’est de constater que la Ville a écouté ses citoyens. Tout le monde est gagnant», soutient-il.

L’étude se poursuit
Les parents qui avaient donné leur accord afin que leur enfant participe à la vaste étude menée dans une douzaine d’écoles de la région au sujet des effets de la fluoration de l’eau potable pourront poursuivre les mesures entreprises dans cette étude, du moins pour le moment.

Selon le Dr Christian Caron, qui dirige cette étude auprès de 500 élèves de Trois-Rivières et de 500 élèves de Shawinigan, le volet 1 de cette étude demeure pertinent, étant donné qu’il visait à recueillir des données avant que les enfants de Trois-Rivières ne commencent à consommer de l’eau potable fluorée. Les mêmes vérifications seraient faites sur les enfants de Shawinigan, mais également sur des élèves de Châteauguay, là où l’eau est fluorée depuis de nombreuses années.

Ainsi, si le chercheur ne pourra pas aller recueillir des données sur les enfants qui auront commencé à boire de l’eau potable fluorée, il pourra au moins se servir de l’échantillon de Trois-Rivières comme ville témoin par rapport aux données observées à Châteauguay.

«Il y a des données très intéressantes à aller chercher au cours de ce volet, notamment quant au contrôle des biais de causes de carie et de protection de carie», croit le Dr Caron.

Toutefois, le ministère et l’équipe de chercheurs réévalueront ultérieurement la pertinence de poursuivre l’étude à Trois-Rivières pour les autres volets de la recherche, étant donné que l’objectif était de recueillir des données sur les enfants qui commençaient à consommer de l’eau fluorée.

«Ce qui est plus déplorable, c’est que nous avions une chance unique de déterminer des données à propos d’enfants qui n’avaient jamais reçu la fluoration et qui débutaient, et évaluer les données d’année en année en dehors de tout biais. Ça aurait certainement clarifié de nombreuses questions, des mythes et des idées que nous avions sur le sujet. C’est un rendez-vous manqué, et comme chercheur ça me désole beaucoup», confie le Dr Caron.

Le volet 1 de l’étude devrait se poursuivre environ jusqu’au mois de mars, estime Christian Caron. Par la suite, le tout sera réévalué avec le ministère et les parents d’enfants participant à l’étude seront tenus informés de la suite des choses.

«Dommage pour les enfants»
La coordonnatrice de COMSEP et ancienne conseillère municipale Sylvie Tardif accueille avec déception l’abandon de la fluoration de l’eau. Selon elle, ce sont les enfants en situation de pauvreté qui vont écoper de cette décision.

«Je comprends le maire d’avoir pris cette décision, j’aurais probablement fait la même chose à sa place. Et les opposants ont mené une campagne bien montée, ils ont bien travaillé. Mais au bout du compte, c’était une mesure de santé publique universelle qui allait surtout être bénéfique aux enfants pauvres. C’est dommage pour les enfants», croit Mme Tardif qui, lorsqu’elle était conseillère, avait voté en faveur de la fluoration pour cette raison.

L’ex-politicienne comprend que ça aurait été lourd pour les conseillers municipaux en faveur de la mesure de porter ça durant leur porte-à-porte en cette année électorale.

«On espère maintenant que les opposants à la fluoration mettront autant d’énergies dans la demande pour des mesures de prévention destinées aux enfants, mais pour le moment, elle ne viendra pas cette campagne d’éducation populaire. On est devant un vide. Et de telles campagnes n’auront jamais l’impact que la fluoration aurait eu dans les milieux défavorisés», signale Mme Tardif, qui mentionne tout de même que l’organisme COMSEP a volontairement choisi de ne pas mener cette lutte, notamment en raison de son manque de ressources et des trop nombreuses coupes à son budget de fonctionnement.


Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Councilor for the Pointe-du-Lac François Bélisle district, believes the decision taken on Monday night by the municipal council is a victory for all citizens of Trois- Rivers.

Mr. Bélisle, who had asked last June that the city should go to a popular consultation to resolve the issue of social acceptability once and for all, believes that the decision of Trois-Rivières probably put an end to the Quebec program of fluoridation of drinking water.

“It just put a serious nail in the coffin of maintaining this program. It was ridiculous because it seemed like the fighting was going on in Trois-Rivières for all of Quebec, but it was not up to us to carry that fight,” he believes.

For François Bélisle, it was up to the Department of Health and Social Services to impose such a measure if it was really a public health issue.

“The ministry never wanted to put on its panties to impose it. But the reality is that it does not rise. This money could be so much better invested in other measures, in the greater presence of dental hygienists in schools, in preventive measures to get brushing teeth and to adopt healthy eating habits,” believes François Bélisle.

His request for public consultation last June finally resulted in a compromise requesting the Ministry of Health to demonstrate the social acceptability of the measure. It is precisely this lack of demonstration in the eyes of the mayor that put a term to the extent and which led to the decision taken on Monday evening by the council.

For François Bélisle, the decision of the council and the mayor shows great listening to the message sent by the population. “I have modest triumph, but reason has prevailed. Nearly 20,000 people signed a petition, it’s not nothing. I am an elected official and I am here to serve the citizens, and I am pleased to see that the City has listened to its citizens. Everyone is a winner,” he says.

The study continues:
Parents who agreed to have their child participate in the large study conducted in a dozen schools in the region on the effects of fluoridation of drinking water will be able to continue the measures undertaken in this study, at least for the moment.

According to Dr. Christian Caron, who is leading this study with 500 students in Trois-Rivières and 500 students in Shawinigan, component 1 of this study remains relevant as it aimed to collect data before the children of Trois -Riveres begin to consume fluoridated drinking water. The same checks would be made on the children of Shawinigan, but also on students of Châteauguay, where the water has been fluoridated for many years.

For example, if the researcher cannot collect data on children who have begun drinking fluoridated drinking water, they can at least use the Trois-Rivières sample as a control city compared to the data observed at Chateauguay.

“There is some very interesting data to look for in this component, particularly in terms of controlling the bias of caries and caries,” says Dr. Caron.

However, the Department and the research team will subsequently reassess the relevance of continuing the study to other parts of the research in Trois-Rivières as the objective was to collect data on children who were beginning to consume Fluoridated water.

“What is more deplorable is that we had a unique opportunity to determine data about children who had never received fluoridation and who started, and to evaluate data year after year bias. It certainly would have clarified many questions, myths and ideas that we had on the subject. It’s a missed opportunity, and as a researcher, I’m very sorry, “says Dr. Caron.

Part 1 of the study is expected to continue until approximately March, says Christian Caron. Subsequently, all will be re-evaluated with the ministry and parents of children participating in the study will be kept informed of the next steps.

“Pity for children”
The Coordinator of COMSEP and former municipal councilor Sylvie Tardif welcomes with disappointment the abandonment of the fluoridation of the water. According to her, it is the children in poverty who are going to be affected by this decision.

“I understand the mayor to have made that decision, I probably would have done the same in his place. And the opponents led a well-mounted campaign, they worked well. But ultimately, it was a universal public health measure that was going to be most beneficial for poor children. It is a pity for the children, “says Mrs. Tardif, who, when she was councilor, had voted in favor of fluoridation for that reason.

The ex-politician understands that it would have been cumbersome for the councilors in favor of the measure to wear it during their door-to-door in this election year.

“It is now hoped that opponents of fluoridation will put as much energy into demand for preventive measures for children, but for now it will not come by this popular education campaign. We are in front of a void. And such campaigns will never have the impact that fluoridation would have had in disadvantaged areas,” says Tardif, who nevertheless mentions that the organization COMSEP has voluntarily chosen not to carry out this fight, in particular because of Its lack of resources and too many cuts to its operating budget.

Fluoration: la Ville fera volte-face / The City Does An About-Face On Fluoridation

Trouvailles Médiatiques Spéciales 300 x 300Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), 21 novembre 2016 – Coup de théâtre à l’hôtel de ville de Trois-Rivières.

Le maire Yves Lévesque annoncera lundi soir, à l’occasion de la séance régulière du conseil municipal, que la Ville abandonne l’idée de fluorer son eau potable.

Selon deux sources très au fait du dossier, le maire en fera l’annonce ce soir, même si le point n’apparaît pas à l’ordre du jour.

Certains éléments demeureraient à attacher pour que l’abandon du programme soit effectif, ce qui pourrait donc être officialisé à une date ultérieure. Mais le premier magistrat annoncera tout de même ses couleurs lundi soir.

Le projet de fluoration de l’eau potable avait fait couler beaucoup d’encre au cours des derniers mois, notamment en raison d’une forte opposition et d’une pétition signée par plus de 20 000 personnes et ce, malgré les nombreux avis de la Santé publique plaidant en faveur du programme de fluoration de l’eau potable.

Tous les détails dans Le Nouvelliste de mardi


Paule Vermot-Desroches, Le Nouvelliste (Trois-Rivières), November 21, 2016 –
Spectacular turn of events at the town hall of Trois-Rivières.

Mayor Yves Lévesque will announce on Monday evening, at the regular council meeting, that the city is abandoning the idea of fluoridating its drinking water.

According to two learned sources familiar with the matter, the mayor will announce it tonight, even if the item does not appear on the agenda.

Some elements remain to be addressed for the program to be phased out, which could therefore be formalized at a later date. But the first magistrate will announce his colors all the same Monday evening.

The drinking water fluoridation project had been a major subject of discussion in recent months, particularly due to strong opposition and a petition signed by more than 20,000 people despite public health advocating for the drinking water fluoridation program.

All the details in Le Nouvelliste on Tuesday

Water Fluoridation Plebiscite Possible (Sarnia, Ontario)

COF-COF News Find 300 x 300By: Barbara Simpson, Sarnia Observer ‘Sarnia City Hall Notebook’, 14-Nov-2016 – Sarnia voters could be voting on water fluoridation come the next municipal election.

Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley says he’s planning to bring a motion forward to council calling for the city to hold a plebiscite on the contentious issue.

The move comes after the issue of water fluoridation returned to council chambers Monday night.

Sarnia resident Rod Gowrie called on council Monday to take steps to express its opposition to water fluoridation based on the findings of scientific research he has collected.

He said water coming from the Lambton Area Water Supply System (LAWSS) – the provider of drinking water for several local municipalities – contains at least 14 chemicals classified as having “substantial risk of developmental neurotoxicity” by the Environmental Protection Agency.

“Fluoride is rated slightly more toxic than lead and slightly less toxic than arsenic,” he told council Monday.

He called on council to send an indemnification letter to LAWSS notifying the agency of its opposition to water fluoridation.

But council instead opted Monday to call on Lambton County’s medical officer of health to advise on the matter.

“I see a big benefit to having the medical officer of health’s opinion on it,” said Coun. Dave Boushy. “If the medical officer of health is against it, that could swing the other member municipalities because they all pay for the medical officer of health through the county.”