On Wednesday, July 2, 1997, National Federation of Federal Employees, Local
2050, which consists of professionals at EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C.,
voted unanimously to co-sponsor the California Safe Drinking Water Initiative
that would reverse the State Legislature's 1995 law mandating fluoridation.
Both proponents of fluoridation and the sponsors of this initiative consider the
result of the fluoridation battle in California to be crucial to the federal
governments plan to fluoridate the entire United States by the year 2000.
The complete press release is in the Environment
directory.
We reported previously that a temporary restraining order to stop fluoridation in Hendersonville,
North Carolina was granted in April, 1997. We are now informed that a permanent restraining
order was not granted.
As reported in the Washington Post, June 16, 1997; page C5, The Food and Drug
Administration requires this new warning label on all fluoride toothpaste and dental care
products shipped after April 7, 1997: "If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing,
seek professional help or contact a poison control center immediately."
The new warning is a part of a trend that began in 1991 as it became recognized that small
children have a tendency to swallow enough toothpaste to cause dental fluorosis or fluoride
poisoning. Dental fluorosis is a widespread side effect of using fluoride toothpaste and
fluoridated water. White spots, brown stains and pitting of enamel are signs of dental fluorosis.
For a fluoride toothpaste to display the American Dental Association seal of approval, these
warnings must be included: "Don't Swallow -- Use only a pea-sized amount for children under
six," and "Children under 6 should be supervised while brushing with any toothpaste to prevent
swallowing." The list of warnings now begins with, "Keep out of the reach of children under 6
years of age." The FDA has jurisdiction to make these rules because fluoride in toothpaste is
classified as a drug. The new warning may seem confusing to some people who have been led to
believe that fluorides are safe. A spokesman for a toothpaste company said, "I'm sure our 800
number is going to get more calls as products with the new warnings show up on store shelves."
Clifford Whall, director of product evaluations at the American Dental Association Council on
Scientific Affairs, said, "There wasn't really a need for the cautionary statement about the danger
of poisoning if you've ingested too much." He admits that there are reports of poisoning from
fluoride toothpaste, but denies that poisoning resulted in "adverse effects." He laments that the
new warning could "frighten" people into not using fluoride toothpaste.
The Safe Drinking Water Initiative would make fluoridation of public water
systems unlawful in California. This is in response to the statewide
mandatory fluoridation law that was passed by the California state legislature
in 1995. To put the initiative on the ballot, 500,000 valid signatures of
registered voters must be collected by early October, 1997. Information for
volunteers for collecting signatures for the petition will be posted in the
Political Action directory of
Fluoride Issues.
The initiative is backed by
California
Citizens for Health, the Preventive
Dental Health Association and the
Safe Water Coalition.
The estimated cost of the campaign is $500,000.
Health Alert: Don't Swallow Your Toothpaste, produced by Bob
Woffinden, will be shown on Channel 4 on Thursday, June 19 at 8pm in Manchester,
England. For full details, see the article,
"Clear and present danger", by Bob Woffinden, reprinted with permission from
The Guardian Weekend, June 7, 1997. This is an excellent review of
the current status of the fluoridation controversy in Great Britain. Dr.
Mullenix is reported to have settled out of court. She was dismissed from her
post at Forsythe Institute for publishing incontrovertible evidence of the
neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in Neurotoxicology and Teratology.
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water and the Safe Water Association
have agreed to assist the Preventive Dental Health Association in forming
a Dental Fluorosis Registry for North America. This is similar to the
Dental Fluorosis Registry in Great Britain which succeeded in filing a class
action suit against purveyors of fluoridated toothpaste last year. Children
or adults who have dental fluorosis should enroll immediately. Dental
fluorosis is the first visible sign of fluoride toxicity in children. It is
a discoloring of teeth and is a permanent damage caused by excessive exposure
of small children to fluoride during tooth development. It ranges in color
from mild fluorosis which is barely visible whitish spots on teeth to brown
spots and even dark brown teeth in severe cases. For more information, Call
(800)728-3833 or (800)SAVE TEEth. The American Academy of Pediatrics, in
order to reduce the increasing incidence of dental fluorosis, recommends no
fluoride exposure for infants (Pediatrics, Vol. 95, No. 5, May 1995).
A review of recent scientific literature, by Mark Diesendorf, Ph.D. and
others, published in the Australian &
New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 21 (2): 187-190 (1997),
reveals a consistent pattern of evidence that fluoride damages bones.
There is negligible benefit from ingesting fluoride and any small benefit
from fluoridation comes from the action of fluoride on the surface of the
teeth before fluoridated water is swallowed. The authors report their
first hand experiences of how evidence of the harmfulness and
ineffectiveness of fluoridation has been ignored or presented in a
misleading way in their countries.
A preliminary restraining order against fluoridation was won in Hendersonville, North Carolina
on April 30, 1997. This could lead to an injunction to cease and desist fluoridating
Hendersonville's water supply. The grounds for the legal action is that the water supplier has a
"duty to warn" water consumers of potential harm from using fluoridated water. Fluoridation
without adequate warnings is a reckless endangerment to "vulnerable subsets of the population."
The vulnerable subsets of the population are listed on page 112 of Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, a compilation of
generally accepted scientific evidence. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the city will
be required to implement "adequate warnings and continue to issue warnings." The scope of
such an endeavor would be complex and costly. The proponents of fluoridation do not want to
tell the general public about potential adverse effects from exposure to fluorides. The "duty to
warn" legal theory was one of the theories suggested by George Glasser in his 1996 booklet, Fluoride: A Toxic Tort Perspective.
"Dental and public health administrators should be aware of the total
fluoride exposure in the population before introducing any additional
fluoride programme for caries prevention." (Fluoride and Oral Health,
WHO,1994)
Health departments cannot know how much fluoride people are already getting
from water,food,dental health products,medicines,insecticide,pesticide and
fertilizer residues-even from the air they breathe.
A leading article in the Journal of the American Dental Association (Dec.
1995) stated:
"More recently, concerns have been raised about the increased prevalence
and severity of dental fluorosis in the United States due to the widespread
ingestion of fluoride from a variety of sources. Local and regional studies
in the United States and Canada have found the prevalence of dental fluorosis
to range from about 20 to 80 precent...The optimal level of fluoride intake
has never been determined scientifically and has been used only in general
terms."
As long ago as 1933, the Journal of Dental Research contained an article
entitled
"Mottled Enamel: A Preventable Endemic Lesion of the Teeth That Presents
a New Problem in Civic Responsibility," with "no alternative except to
discard fluorine-bearing water supplies, and substitute others that are
fluorine-free."
An attempt to mandate artificial fluoridation of the water supplies in
the Hawaiian Islands was unanimously blocked in Finance Committee on April 9.
The defeat of the Resolution in Hawaii has been welcomed by opponents of
fluoridation across the United States. "The Fluoridation of Drinking Water: a
house of cards waiting to fall" states Dr.Paul Connett, Ph.D., Professor of
Chemistry and Environmental Studies, St. Lawrence University. Growing public
awareness of the lack of safety and effectiveness of fluoridation led to the
practice being halted on Long Island, NY, in Worcester, MA and Erie, PA. "Mandates"
have been rejected in Pennsylvania, Kansas, Washington states, and in several other
communities within the last year.
Cryolite (sodium aluminofluoride, sodium hexafluoroaluminate or sodium aluminum fluoride) is
a fluorine-containing insecticide which is produced synthetically and is also found in
naturally occurring mineral deposits. Cryolite is used almost exclusively as an agricultural crop
protection insecticide.
The EPA has concluded that complete and acceptable crop residue data are available to support
the proposed tolerance of 2 ppm in or on potatoes. Data previously reviewed by the EPA show
background levels of fluoride in untreated potatoes ranging from 0.14 ppm to 0.31 ppm. Levels
of fluoride found in treated potatoes ranged from 0.18 ppm to 0.94 ppm.
The EPA has concluded that an acceptable potato processing study supports the proposed
tolerance of 22 ppm in or on processed potato waste. This study indicates that cryolite residues
concentrated 11 times in potato peels/potato waste. The cryolite residue of toxicological
concern is fluoride; and health effects identified for fluoride in humans and animals are skeletal
and dental fluorosis. The EPA does not consider dental fluorosis (mottling of tooth enamel) to
be an adverse effect. This calls to mind the poplar notion that potatoe peels are the most
nutritious part of the potatoe. It has been proven for quite some years now that fluoride is not a
nutrient.
For more detail, see the article, The Cryolite Task Force:
Pesticide Tolerance Petition Filing.
EPA Scientists Endorse California Safe Drinking Water Initiative
Restraining Order Fails
July 3, 1997
FDA Requires Additional Warning on Toothpaste Labels
June 24, 1997
California Safe Drinking Water Initiative Petition
Drive Gets Under Way
June 15, 1997
Programme to be Aired
June 14, 1997
North American Dental Fluorosis Registry
June 11, 1997
New Research Finds Bones Are Damaged by Fluoridation
June 1, 1997
Restraining Order Stops Fluoridation
May 13, 1997
Official Fluoridation Standards Change
May 7, 1997
On March 8, 1997, the National Parent Teacher Association revised its Fluoride in Water
Position Statement. The "optimal" fluoride level in public water supplies used to be 0.7 to 1.2
parts per million. Now, it's 0.6 to 1.0 parts per million. Avoidance of fluoride supplementation
for infants aged 0 to 6 months is another addition to the PTA position statement. These changes
are recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Dental
Association. The recommendations reflect new findings that there is now so much fluoride from
combined sources that water fluoridation may be measurably harmful to an increasingly large
proportion of the general population as noted in the following citations:
Sierra Club Chapter Adopts Resolution on Anti-Fluoridation Policy
May 5, 1997
On January 11, 1997, the Pennsylvania Chapter of the Sierra Club passed a resolution to oppose
fluoridation of public drinking water supplies throughout Pennsylvania. A statement of
supporting facts is included in the resolution which is
reprinted in the Environment directory of Fluoride Issues.
Paradise Islands Preserved
April 13 ,1997
EPA to Consider Tolerance Levels for Fluoride in Potatoes from Insecticide Residue
April 7, 1997