CHAPEL HILL – A group of protesters brought their concerns about fluoride to OWASA’s meeting Thursday, even thought no one was there to listen.
Fluoride Free Chapel Hill/Carrboro members had planned to petition against fluoride at the Orange Water and Sewer Authority’s board of directors meeting. The meeting was canceled Aug. 10 when OWASA staff told the board there wasn’t any reason to meet on Aug. 24.
The fluoride critics showed up anyway to oppose OWASA’s plan to restart fluoridation of Chapel Hill and Carrboro’s drinking water.
The policy is medicating people without their consent and is adding a harmful neurotoxin to the water, the critics said. They cited suspected effects, such as lower intelligence, thyroid and bone damage, arthritic symptoms, cancers and reproductive problems.
Corey Sturmer began researching fluoride after experiencing dental fluorosis: damage to tooth enamel caused by too much fluoride. OWASA has an agenda, he said, and doesn’t want to hear from critics or its their policy.
“Psychologically, people have been hit over the head for 50 years with the idea that this is good for you, so our biggest challenge is getting the people to really recognize how significant this is,” Sturmer said.
Announcement: I have been invited for an interview with L.A. Batchelor, a local radio show / podcast host to continue discussion around public water Fluoridation.
Tune in 6pm EST or revisit the 4/20/2017 Episode to hear me break down the criminal water fluoridation program and it’s machinations in the Triangle NC area.
On April 4th and April 6th fellow anti-fluoride activist Daria Barazandeh appeared on L.A.’s show to discuss the public health concerns and total intransigence of the OWASA board. I will bring a different perspective and expand upon Daria’s previous elaborations around the difficulties working with the various governmental bureaucracies and how they manifest the propaganda to continue doing business as usual.
In the wake of a water utility disaster which involved the Orange Water and Sewer Authority “accidentally” over-fluoridating the public water supply, OWASA is holding a series of meetings to discuss the emergency and hear from concerned citizens regarding the incident. At the first public comment section which took place February 9, the majority of citizens who took time to speak focused narrowly on OWASA’s longstanding public water fluoridation policy and demanded it’s immediate cessation. OWASA had been warned about the dangers as far back as 2012, but persisted in their march to fluoridate leading up to the disaster. OWASA has actually already suspended the public water fluoridation program after the ‘accident’ but then brought in an alleged “Independent Consultant” who was tasked with delivering a report on the infrastructure failures and ways to improve. The consultant is CH2M Hill, which is a multi-billion dollar government trough company with negative revenue who also happens to have a conflict of interest in this matter since they contract with the very same fertilizer companies who produce and sell fluoride across the United States. Not surprisingly, CH2M Hill is being even less critical of the fluoridation policy than OWASA and it seems apparent that the Town of Chapel Hill will continue the policy if the citizens don’t speak up. In the 2nd public comment meeting on this topic, OWASA accomplished the following things;
1) Admitted that Fluoride causes leaching from lead pipes / joints / fixtures
2) Admitted that OWASA is not mandated to fluoridate
3) Admitted by omission that OWASA customers never voted to fluoridate
4) Admitted that there is no barrier between the fluoridation clearwell and the distribution system
5) Admitted that they will allow over-fluoridation in the future as a cost-benefit to prevent having to cut off the water
Dear Colleen,My name is Corey Sturmer & I am a 25 year resident of the triangle. In 2011 I became aware that the city governments of Wake, Durham & Orange county have had a more than 60 year long policy of purchasing waste chemicals (hydrofluorosilicic acid/ silicofluorides, fluorosilicic acid) from fertilizer & aluminum industry & distributing it to the citizens through their water supply, ostensibly to help “prevent tooth decay.”
I happen to know that the propaganda surrounding its efficacy as a preventative health measure came directly from the health & human services department of our federal government, and secondarily through the public health departments of the respective states…Then on downward to each county. Generally speaking the states’ position has amazingly not changed much in the last 60 years, despite all of the evidence which has come out on the practice since it was first instituted in the late 1950’s.
I was present earlier this month before the board of commissioners of orange county to provide a common sense approach to why this policy should be reversed IMMEDIATELY. I am e-mailing you because I understand this issue has now been brought to your attention by the commissioners & they are waiting for some advisement from you & the board of health of orange county.
So I would like you to please consider the following as common sense reasons why this policy should end.
Civil Liberty, Informed Consent, Lack of Licensure
Nobody in the history of public water fluoridation has ever debated the fact that the alleged purpose of the policy is to help prevent tooth decay.
According to the Federal Drug Administration’s code section 201(g)1, definition of a drug, a drug is defined by its INTENDED APPLICATION
(g)(1) The term “drug” means (A) articles recognized in the official United States Pharmacopoeia, official Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, or official National Formulary, or any supplement to any of them; and (B) articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other animals; and (C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.
If the county wants to apply fluoride to the water for the purposes of preventing tooth decay, then they are legally bound to have it approved by the FDA as being safe and effective for such an application. Please take notice that Fluoride has NEVER BEEN APPROVED by the FDA: http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/fda/not-approved/
Since it is impossible for any being to deny that fluoridation is de facto drugging of the water supply, we then need to consider what North Carolina general statutes say about distributing (unapproved) drugs without a license. It is in fact a Class H Felony to do so, which would mean the offending parties in Orange county are guilty of violating North Carolina state drug laws.See: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_106/GS_106-145.6.pdf
G.S. 106-145.6
§ 106-145.6. Denial, revocation, and suspension of license; penalties for violations.
Adverse Action.
The Commissioner may deny a license to an applicant if the Commissioner determines that granting the applicant a license would not be in the public interest. Public interest considerations shall be limited to factors and qualifications that are directly related to the protection of public health and safety. The Commissioner may deny, suspend, or revoke a license for substantial or repeated violations
of this Article or for conviction of a violation of any other federal, state, or local prescription drug law or regulation. Chapter 150B of the General Statutes governs the denial, suspension, or revocation of a license under this Article.
(b)
Criminal Sanctions.
–
It is unlawful to engage in wholesale distribution in this State without a wholesale distributor license or to violate any other provision of this Article. A person who violates this Article commits a Class H felony. A fine imposed for a violation of this Article may not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000).
Lastly – drugging the water supply in such a manner violates informed consent laws, which require the patient to be informed & to give their explicit consent before accepting a medical treatment like fluoride. It may also violate certain individual’s freedom of religious expression since some religions forbid consumption of toxins such as fluoride. If they don’t even know fluoride is added to their water they could be unwittingly committing blaspheme!
These basic rights should be respected & protected by the county, not deliberately destroyed.
Precautionary Principle
The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is not harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action.The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from taking a particular course or making a certain decision when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk.
Colleen – There is no scientific consensus that fluoride is harmless. In fact quite the opposite.I challenge the board of health to bear the burden of proof that consuming fluoride through the water supply is NOT harmful in any way. This is a rhetorical challenge because it is impossible for your board of health to do it. Even the promoters of fluoridation have admitted that drinking fluoride will inevitably cause some degree of dental fluorosis which is the outward manifestation of systemic overexposure. This is well reported by the center for disease control. Fluorosis shows up as white spotting & mottling of the dental enamel. Therefore it can not be refuted that fluoride is detrimental & thus – does not comply with the precautionary principle & should not be a policy!
If dental fluorisis is not enough harm to satisfy you, then please consider these more recent studies which raise enormous doubts about the safety & efficacy of public water fluoridation:
I appreciate your consideration to this critical public health issue & would like to offer my contact information if you have any questions or concerns about this inquiry.
Colleen Bridger’s Response to Our Petitions; A Recommendation to Continue Drugging Orange County’s Water Supply
Good afternoon,
I wanted to share with you the information I sent the Board of County Commissioners regarding your concerns about the health effects of fluoride in municipal drinking water. I’ve attached just a few of the documents I reviewed in making my recommendation for your information. The key points from this review are:
1) The preponderance of medical and dental organizations nationally and in North Carolina support community water fluoridation as safe and effective and
2) Water fluoridation decisions are made by the entities that provide municipal water. The largest municipal water supplier in Orange County is OWASA and they just this year voted to continue fluoridating their water.
Therefore my recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (and also my recommendation to the OWASA Board when they asked) is that they support the very important, safe and effective public health practice of fluoridating municipal water supplies.
Thank you so much for bringing this issue to our attention. We can miss important health issues affecting our community and need active residents like you to make sure we are always staying on top of the myriad health threats that we face. I will continue to monitor the emerging research on the health effects of fluoridating municipal drinking water and if I see any reason to revisit this recommendation, I assure you I absolutely will.
My Spoken Response to Colleen Bridger on October 7 2014
Letter attached to Colleen Bridger’s Reccomendation Authored by Gary Rozier, a semi-retired Public Health Professor @ UNC
Gary Declines to do Interview about Public Water Fluoridation, despite authoring numerous letters in support of it
Dear Gary,
I was recently notified by the Orange County Health Director Colleen Bridger that she & the health department are publicly endorsing the idea of public water fluoridation in response to some recent petitions that the government stop this practice immediately. After reviewing Colleen’s statement, she appears to be using the attached letter authored by you in 2012 together with several other stated endorsements from various organizations.
I am mailing you Gary because I gather from your letter that you are a highly educated & knowledgeable person on the various machinations & applications of governmental policy, which may result in a city applying a policy like water fluoridation to the population. I also gather that you sincerely believe that this is an appropriate role for government to play, which is a legitimate position to have if you’re honest about it, which I gather you are being.
It is for these reasons I am interested in conducting an interview with you on the topic of health policy & public water fluoridation. Would you be willing to participate? This might be a good opportunity to illustrate to the public why public water fluoridation should be maintained – so I hope you will seize this opportunity.
Let me know your thoughts, & if you’re interested we can worry about logistics.
Corey
__________________________________
Corey, Thank you for the opportunity to participate in a discussion about water fluoridation. However, I am in phased retirement and not able to take on any engagements. Regards! GaryRozier
__________________________________
Gary,
Thanks for the reply…
I find your statement interesting – generally most people I know who enter into full or even phased retirement, are able to find MORE time to take on different engagements. But I understand how freely discussing the realities of public water fluoridation may pose a liability to what appears to be your life’s work. So one way or the other I get the message.Have a good retirement Gary,Corey
I am mailing you to find out if you would be willing to make a public comment on this recent article published by TIME magazine which cites Fluoride as being an industrial chemical that causes harm to the brain.
“Now the same researchers have reviewed the literature and found six additional industrial chemicals that can hamper normal brain development. These are manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. Manganese, they say, is found in drinking water and can contribute to lower math scores and heightened hyperactivity, while exposure to high levels of fluoride from drinking water can contribute to a seven-point drop in IQ on average. The remaining chemicals, which are found in solvents and pesticides, have been linked to deficits in social development and increased aggressive behaviors.”
I’d also like to take this opportunity to make you aware that I receive regular traffic to my website, as a result of people searching YOUR name, ostensibly to discover your feelings on this topic (see graphic below). Whether the people searching your name are in alignment with your “convictions” or not, I’m not sure…but in any case I thought I would offer my website as a platform to get your “expert” analysis on this TIME magazine article & why you feel the general population should ignore all the warnings about drinking too much fluoride published by respected scientists at Harvard University. I will gladly publish whatever you have to say on this subject since I know you are highly motivated to combat any “anti-fluoride” sentiments that show themselves on the internet.
Corey, i have no specific comment for you to place on your little blog. Actually, it’s of no concern to me what you post on it. If you simply want to be educated on Grandjean’s statements, first, notice that there is no mention of concentration levels of fluoride, simply the implication that the mere presence of fluoride at any concentration will “hamper brain development”. There is no substance known to man which is not toxic at improper levels, including plain water. Fluoride is certainly no exception. Concentration level is the difference between safety and toxicity of ANY substance we ingest. Water is fluoridated at the minuscule concentration of 0.7 ppm. At this concentration it is not toxic. If you care to dispute this elementary fact then provide valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support your claim. Keep in mind that the antifluoridationist websites, and blogs on which you solely rely for your “information” do not qualify as valid sources.
As far as Choi and Grandjean’s Harvard Review on which Grandjean bases his “suggestions” about IQ and brain development in regard to fluoridated water, this was actually a review of 27 Chinese studies found in obscure Chinese scientific journals, of the effects of high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in the well water of various Chinese, Mongolian, and Iranian village. The concentration of fluoride in these studies was as high as 11.5 ppm. By the admission of the Harvard researchers, these studies had key information missing, used questionable methodologies, and had inadequate controls for confounding factors. These studies were so seriously flawed that the lead researchers, Anna Choi, and Phillippe Grandjean, were led to issue the following statement in September of 2012:
“–These results do not allow us to make any judgment regarding possible levels of risk at levels of exposure typical for water fluoridation in the U.S. On the other hand, neither can it be concluded that no risk is present. We therefore recommend further research to clarify what role fluoride exposure levels may play in possible adverse effects on brain development, so that future risk assessments can properly take into regard this possible hazard.”
–Anna Choi, research scientist in the Department of Environmental Health at HSPH, lead author, and Philippe Grandjean, adjunct professor of environmental health at HSPH, senior author
As it seems there have been no translations of these studies into English by any reliable, objective source, it is unclear as to whether they had even been peer-reviewed, a basic for credibility of any scientific study. These studies were flawed that NOTHING could be “concluded” from them.
I have to be honest I really just wanted to be entertained by the psychological acrobatics I knew you would perform in order to justify the continued addition of an industrial chemical to our water supply. Like always you delivered so thanks for the laughs!
However I must admit it would be a lot funnier if it wasn’t so sad, how many people like yourself have to resort to picking a part each damning study which individually contribute to the gradual chipping away at the 60 year long PR stunt that is public water fluoridation. I respect you more than most apologists because at least you put forth a lot of effort…But let’s be real – you are on the defense because the body of evidence which supports public water fluoridation is diminishing quickly & the body of evidence which supports its removal is growing all the time. You & others of your ilk have had your time and I think you are acutely aware of this fact, as evidenced by all the frantic attacks you wage against those who speak out about this crime on the internet.
One would think, given the self pronounced efficacy of this practice, that we would not be finding out about adverse health effects 60 years after the fact & instead the “scientific community” would have known ALL possible ramifications of ingesting fluoride when it was first forced on the American public in the 1950’s. Of course, we know that the establishment did know many of the ramifications (and that they were negative), but this was ignored intentionally & those reasons are precisely why it was rammed down our throats in the first place. NOT for the “dental health” of our nation but to actually impair the rational cognitive ability of the American people, which you epitomize by the way.
It is even more laughable, how focused you & other statists are on the “optimal concentration level” of fluoride in our water, when this so-called “optimal level” was so recently lowered due to the department of health & human services own admission, that over ingestion of fluoride is responsible for 40% of adolescents now suffering from some degree of fluorosis. Statists always hide behind the auspices of having figured out the “exact optimal level” of fluoridation thanks to the “science,” except they never acknowledge that their “science” was originally flawed by their own admission. Do you not see how discrediting it is to unilaterally change the “optimal level” without admitting that the prior “optimal” was too much?
Maybe that’s a mental trapeze act you just aren’t ready to perform yet.
Of course, another thing I never hear you & other statists say, is whether you actually know the proper “dose” of fluoride. I suspect this is because
There isn’t a proper dose to ingest orally since drinking fluoride is absolutely non-essential & has no material positive effect on any organ when ingested &
Talking about dosages & what medications one should ingest would be outside the scope of your licensure as a dentist & surely discredit you as a legitimate source of information on this topic…
But you have already discredited yourself countless times around the web & I thank you for providing one more example today.
Gee, Corey, it’s not like I haven’t seen all this ridiculous nonsense copied/pasted from antifluoridationist websites, countless times. Your total lack of success in furthering your irrational vendetta against fluoridation, in spite of your repeated “presentations” to intelligent people, is all that needs to be viewed in regard to your claims. Why don’t you surprise everyone and actually come up with something intelligent, instead of just parroting Connett’s nonsense from “fluoridealert.org“?
Without giving any credence to your opinion of what is “intelligent” or not, since it has been made abundantly clear that you are no authority whatsoever on original thought, I humbly submit my latest video which will teach you more about water in 10 minutes than you ever learned in the fluorescent lit halls of academia which seem to have forever savaged your feeble mind.
Thanks, Corey, but I prefer to obtain my information from credible, reliable, and authoritative sources of peer- reviewed scientific literature…..not from “YouTube” videos and antifluoridationist websites.
To understand in a comprehensive manner what transpired in the video above one has to first fully understand the background and context of my effort as an individual to end the practice of fluoridating our public water supplies in Durham, North Carolina.
If you have been following this blog you may already be aware of my journeys as a turd through the bowels of Durham’s city government so if you want to skip to the culminating event, Click Here.
In order to put the culminating event in the proper context what follows is a chronologically succinct account of my efforts which all lead up to the rather climactic events from this past Thursday evening.
My Awakening
In December 2011 I was getting dental work done on my back molars when I was inspired to ask the question,
“Is there Fluoride in the drinking water?”
The dentist replied,
“Yes of course!”
I had always heard fluoride was in the drinking water but never quite understood how drinking it would do any good for just my teeth but not affect other parts of my body – so I asked
“Why is it in the drinking water again?”
The simple yet oft repeated response came without surprise,
“It’s good for your dental enamel.”
The problem with this statement is that it is never accompanied by anything more than anecdotal evidence and in my case, the anecdotal evidence was not so supportive of drinking fluoride. You see, I was diagnosed early on with having a defect known as “Dental Fluorosis” which is the literal degradation and deterioration of dental enamel.
This condition is partly responsible for my needing such dramatic dental work done in the first place but more than anything is indicative of fluoride overexposure from the inside out. This means every other organ in my body is also overexposed which bothers me greatly.
Naturally, such a contradiction of circumstances caused me to question the official rhetoric on this topic and lead me to do a great deal of research which is where the real story begins…
Click for Larger View – These are my teeth which are consistent with the scientific literature on patients suffering from dental Fluorosis.
My Dental Xrays which Show Fluorosis and dental decay
My First Appearance
What I uncovered in my research was so startling I began to wonder who I should tell. At first I was simply alarmed at the idea that something in our drinking water would be so dangerous, but at the time was not mentally prepared for the bureaucracy and cognitive dissonance I would later experience when trying to bring this information to everyone’s attention.
In an almost automated emotional reaction to the research I uncovered about public water fluoridation, I appeared for the first time before the Durham City Council on December 20th, 2011. With little forethought I showed up to bluntly present the damning evidence that Fluoride has been shown to reduce IQ, cause skeletal fragility and bone density issues, as well as cause the condition I suffer from – Fluorosis.
The response to my petition came promptly from Mayor Bill Bell which will not surprise anyone who has any experience with corporate government,
Obviously, the suggestion [to remove fluoride] would be a dramatic change from the way we presently operate, I’m sure the manager and his staff will take it under advisement and come back with a recommendation.”
The “manager and his staff” eventually did take it under advisement and came back with the following recommendation:
In response to my statement on December 25, 2011 the following article was published by Ray Gronberg and the local Herald Sun newspaper which broadly dismissed my miniscule effort to raise awareness. The publication of this article only thickened the plot however because in it certain governmental authorities were prompted to respond to my allegations. Their response which inherently must be deceptive became motivation for me to continue exposing their lies. Kevin Buchholtz, a NC Dept. of Health and Human Services stooge who later plays a role in this saga replied to my petition by saying,
From the State’s perspective trying to respond to every allegation regarding fluoride is challenging and counterproductive.”
My Next Move
Having been totally dissatisfied with the City’s response to my petition, I decided to make things a lot more challenging from the ‘state’s perspective’ and created this website in January 2012. Since then DurhamAgainstFluoride.com has served as a media platform to document my effort and spread the word locally and abroad.
The initial publication about my December appearance at city council combined with the creation of this website was enough to grab the attention of some other fluoride activists who reached out and began coaching me on how to be more effective with my efforts. One such activist was Jeff Green, National Director for Citizens for Safe Drinking water who taught me how to tangle with the government on their terms. The result of my discussions with him manifested in My Next Move, which was a formal request for documentation made on March 22, 2012.
According to the strategy the best way to expose the lack of scientific evidence which supports community water fluoridation is to ask for it! Jeff emphasized that since the evidence is on our side, asking for toxicological studies and other documentation will put The Powers That Be on defense, shifting the burden of proof to the city who then must convince us that fluoridation is such a critical public health benefit. The reasoning was that if no documentation existed, the inability to produce it would cause even the most ignorant in government to begin asking questions internally.
So in January-February 2012 I began making phone calls to the water management department in order to procure the documents I knew did not exist. What transpired was a series of dead ends which eventually produced the following, stunning information:
Systematically bleeds the cocktail of pollutants @ .7 parts per/million into our drinking water as a way of disposing the waste
Even more stunning still was the only formal document ever tendered by the water authority which testifies to the safety of Hydrofluorosilicic Acid. This chemical, which has a HAZMAT rating of 8 Corrosive, is admitted in the city’s OWN literature to cause fluorosis and bone density issues as well as having 0 toxicological studies:
AVOID INGESTION
No Toxicological Studies, No Carcinogenicity Ratings!
NO Liability to distributor, NOT regulated!
Dissatisfied with this as evidence of fluoride’s crucial public health benefit, I appeared on March 22, 2012 to make the city council aware of this absence of information and to formally request they produce the necessary toxicological documentation to the citizens. What happened next immediately told me that I was up against forces with far more motivation to continue this policy than I had ever originally anticipated.
In a premeditated nature The Powers That Be deployed NC Department of Health and Human Services goon Kevin Bucholtz who is the West Region Supervisor for the Oral Health Division. He appeared subsequent my formal request for information to rebut a position I did not even argue. I gotta hand it to Kevin – he really impressed me with such a whirlwind of hypocritical dribble. The most amazing thing is that he came with prepared statements and yet, for 4+ minutes, Kevin rambles on about how the NC Department of Health does not agree with the conclusion drawn by millions of citizens around the world that drinking fluoride is of no public benefit. In the next breath Kevin bluntly admits that hydrofluorosilicic acid can leech lead from the plumbing system and is directly responsible for his own daughter suffering from Fluorosis.
Just so we’re clear:
I attend city council to ask for toxicology studies on fluoride
The state sends their best rep – Kevin – who says in one breath Fluoride is a poison
And in the next, it’s good for you and he’s proud of it
How do you argue with that?
This has to be heard to be believed:
Note: This same appearance was later cited on the Durham Water Management Website in Direct Response to my request for information:
After witnessing first hand the inaction of Durham’s City government I began to firmly understand how crippled the humble minds of our “authorities” really were on this subject and all faith in their willingness to reasonably address this issue was lost.
Since The Powers That Be had acted in such a preemptive and precise manner, I was able to discern intuitively that I should simply try in whatever way possible to raise awareness on this issue and to ignore for a little while the illusion that my appearances at city council affected any great change. So I began exploring other avenues and became more committed to educating by any means necessary.
I began to realize at this point that this is a war of consciousness, spanning time and dimensions so I relied increasingly on pure inspiration and intuition to fuel this effort. I felt increasingly that the effort was past-time fun which lead me to take great joy in the further development of this website, printing flyers, meditating, lucid dreaming and speaking about Fluoride whenever appropriate in conversation. These tiny efforts approached as just a part of regular every day life over time are what I credit with sowing the seeds of later success.
On July 12, 2012 I published this report which cites a 1991 study done in Durham where scientists and the water authority collaborated to study the effects of ending water fluoridation. One of the central pillars holding up the Pro-Fluoridationist argument is the fear tactic that if we stop fluoridating, we will see an explosion in dental cavities. The conclusion of the Durham study makes it an incredibly significant one in that it supports the debunking of this very claim.
Later in this report you will hear a precise example of this from our civil servants who state that children will miss more school if we turn fluoride off, due to the rise in dentist visits from the ensuing tooth decay!
It’s this same crazed fear-tactic which has kept fluoridation ongoing for so long and therefore makes the discovery of this study and it’s implications so worth mentioning in isolation.
The most ironic thing is that I was a likely participant of this study, since it was conducted in Durham during my elementary years with children from the public school I attended. Although any evidence is surely lost in time, it is a distinct possibility which I had to consider and therefore motivated me to send my report to hundreds of government/media/academic professionals in the area.
The study itself measured the incisors of over 1800 gradeschool children in Durham and over the course of an 11 month period, the study concluded no rise in Cavities but a decrease in the level of Fluorosis among participants. For convenience I have posted the video from that report below:
During my research I discovered that the Durham City Council takes their policy directives on public health issues from a separate committee – the Durham County Public Health Board. This meant I had attended the “wrong” body of our government originally which at the time seemed to explain my lack of success. Of course, the government will never point you in the right direction so it only took some months and a lot of personal time to uncover this. This phenomenon where council after committee after working group relegate authority to each other is the leitmotif of our government which is constructed like the layers of an onion for the express purpose that you will hopefully go away.
Nevertheless I was informed that the Public Health Board is instrumental in changing Durham’s fluoridation policy since the city council would vote largely based on the recommendations from this board, who is composed of citizen “experts” from different disciplines. From this point on I made it my goal to educate the Durham Public Health Board, and hopefully get through to enough people to at least bring it to a citizen vote.
During this same time I contacted and began working closely with Steve Daniels & ABC news affiliate WTVD Channel 11, who followed me for a few months while they were producing an investigative report on community water fluoridation.
After some conversations with WTVD it was decided that my next formal step was to appear before the Durham Public Health Board and present the same information I had previously brought to the City Council’s attention.
Thanks to my appearance on September 13 and the presence of local media, the Public Health Board began a formal inquiry into the subject and agreed to look further into the evidence. Despite my reservations that this was just another hoop to jump through, I was quick to accept this as a partial victory since at least the subject was being discussed. When you accept this is a battle for awareness discussion no matter how contrived can only be measured as success.
The reaction was overwhelming for me as well as the WTVD crew. I watched Steve Daniel’s facebook receive thousands of likes, hundreds of comments and I was told personally by the Senior Producer that they had never in her time at WTVD experienced such a passionate response to a story they aired. Anchorman Steve Daniels likewise sent me the following e-mail which pointed to a total success:
Corey –
I have been overwhelmed by the response to the story.
You get all the credit for getting the ball rolling on our end. I appreciate your persistence in pushing us toward revisiting the issue.
We are working on another angle for February.
Let’s stay in touch about your efforts.
-Steve
In response to this negative media attention, the Water Management Department immediately created a job posting for a “Senior Public Affairs Specialist” who would be paid more than $65,000/year to actively combat my efforts to expose these basic truths about public water fluoridation.
With the help of WTVD’s report I was immediately put in touch with fluoride activists from around the world. More importantly I was able to network with local activists who also have a passion for this issue. Thus began my cooperation and more formal collaboration with individuals from Wake County & Chapel Hill, resulting in the following reports and the creation of RaleighAgainstFluoride.com:
Building on the momentum almost one month after the publication of WTVD’s report, I appeared again at the Durham Public Health Board to encourage them to stand on the side of social justice in unison against community water fluoridation. This was moments before they adjourned to have a closed-door meeting where they finalized the board’s next steps to address the citizen concerns on public water fluoridation.
On March 14, 2013 Approximately 16 months after my initial appearance at the Durham City Council I found myself before the Durham County Public Health Board a third time in what can only be described as theculminating event. It is my sincere belief that this will serve as a secondary jump point for this effort towards a new, expanded level of awareness for the general public.
Due to the preceding 16 months of work exposing the fluoride deception in my area I was able to force the county health board to formally acknowledge and review this subject which they begrudgingly did in a contrived & organized fashion to simply perpetuate the status quo.
Keeping with the leitmotif of all corporate governments, the Durham county health board relegated their own logical/rational thinking capabilities to another committee of people in the form of an “expert panel.”
To my total lack of surprise, I found that the panel was cherry picked by the City to achieve a self-described “balanced” perspective on this issue. In other words, the 5-person panel were with only one exception uniformly government-paid employees offering only their personal opinion and not any scientific facts whatsoever. Later In this report you may even hear Department of Health Dental Chief Rebecca King actually cite one of her credentials as having been “a supporter of fluoridation.” Can that be put on a resume?
Before the proceedings began I was given 3 minutes to speak and unfortunately was not able to capture video of this. I was unprepared to speak since the health board would not return my phone calls to find out who would be participating on the “expert panel,” so I simply responded in a reactionary way when my time came.
The following is a basic recall of what I stated to the board & the panel who was present:
Hi everyone, my name is Corey Sturmer. For those of you who don’t know me I have been speaking about public water fluoridation here in Durham for a little more than a year now. During that year I have learned a lot about how government works and I hope to continue that today, as I understand we are having a hearing on this important subject known as community water fluoridation.
So to help make this a successful hearing I would like to urge you the board to ask the expert panel the most appropriate questions possible. So I will just go down the list –
Vicki Westbrook vicki.westbrook@durhamnc.gov
Vicki Westbrook – She is the assistant director of the water management department. You should ask her WHERE the water department purchases the fluoride that is added to our water. If she is honest she will have to tell you that Williams Water Treatment Plant buys hydrofluorosilic acid from a fertilizer manufacturer named MOSAIC. Hydrofluorosilicic acid is the byproduct of phosphate manufacturing and the city helps them dispose of it by bleeding it into our water.
So this is an important thing to ask Vicki and I am sure she will tell you this.
Timothy Wright tim_wright@dentistry.unc.edu
Then we have Mr. Tim Wright & Rebecca King who are licensed Dentists. When you are asking them questions be sure to ask if it is in their professional opinion because as a licensed dentist he is not permitted to answer questions about INGESTING fluoride – otherwise he would need to be an internal medicine doctor. Anything else is just his personal opinion and remember, it is not JUST about the teeth since we are drinking the chemical and therefore exposing all of our cells to the effects of it.
I also see on the agenda several public health officials, and I know that the tendency of all city governments is to follow guidance from the public health department. I think it’s important to remember that as much as they may mean well, it is not up to the public health department to decide what goes in our water – that is a decision for ALL of us – You, me and the rest of the citizens. Do not be intimidated by the public health department either because there are dozens and dozens of examples where cities have ignored their state health department to cease fluoridation.
So if one thing could come out of this meeting it should be that we put this to a vote – and let the CITIZENS decide what goes into the public drinking water. It is all of our decision, as health board members, public health officials or citizens living in durham – so we should let the citizens debate the facts and give them the chance to make an informed decision. Thank you.
Setting the Stage for The Big Lie
In order to effectively brainwash the public health board, The Powers That Be carefully selected 5 individuals (4 present) who collectively paint a broad and deceptive enough brush stroke over the subject of water fluoridation so as to tranquilize any inquisitive mind that may see through their ragged arguments.
As if my 3 minute public comment did not ever happen, the chair of the Public Health Board James Miller can be heard below stating that “Anyone who interrupts will be forced to leave” with The Sheriff Deputy waiting patiently in the corner, clearly requested prior to the meeting in case the known antagonist (myself) were to make any public demonstrations of their deception.
This was an obvious way for the city to keep the panel’s opinion sterile, only to be taken in isolation of all external factors – like factual information from me.
As if insulated from the glaring truths of this issue, the self-concocted pro fluoride cheer-squad began their dreadful & irrelevant rambling on the efficacy of public water fluoridation. Using tired old scripts from the Center for Disease Control, Public Health Department, and American Dental Association which have long been debunked on this site and others, these so-called “experts” offered nothing more than anecdotal evidence and circumlocution of the real core issues to do with the illegal medication of our public water supply.
Vicki Westbrook
vicki.westbrook@durhamnc.gov
First up was Vicki Westbrook who was mentioned previously in my speech and is one of the first persons I confronted on this journey. She offered a mostly inert presentation essentially reiterating the very basic facts of what the Water Management Department does.
The Water Management Department is simply complicit with whatever the City Council says, who further take their mandates from other bureaucratic institutions like the Department of Public Health and the City’s own health board. As such, Vicki’s position is more administrative than anything so I would not ever expect her to rock the boat. I did find it interesting however when she states that the City of Durham began fluoridating due to a “Postcard vote in 1957,” which should give everyone pause.
Amy Keyworth
Next was Amy Keyworth who seems like a bright person but was obviously recruited for dubious reasons beyond her narrow perspective. Amy is a hydrogeologist for the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, which means she is an expert on the groundwater of North Carolina. As you can see in the video she presents some comprehensive data on natural fluoride concentration levels in North Carolina’s ground water, but does not draw any conclusions herself. Her data taken as a solitary perspective is presented to the board without any elucidation as to how this relates to the issue I am raising – namely – the medication of our public drinking water with hydrofluorosilicic acid! This should demonstrate either the corruption of the board or complete ignorance of those who picked the panel since groundwater has absolutely nothing to do with the mandated distribution of purchased chemicals.
The reason her presentation was totally irrelevant is exposed later in the hearing right before I am escorted out of the building by the sheriff. The key point which my higher self forced me to explain is that it is NOT naturally occurring fluoride that is added to our water supply and therefore groundwater has nothing to do with this issue.
Amazingly this is not even HIDDEN on the Water Management Website yet it was obscured in the very hearing which I worked more than 1 year to produce!
Rebecca King is a Dental Advisor for the NC Department of Health and Human Services (Oral Health Division). If you remember from earlier in this saga it was her colleague Kevin Buchholtz from the same division who originally attempted to rebut me during my March 22, 2012 appearance. I wonder if Kevin was not available for this hearing or he was somewhat intimidated by the e-mail I sent him before my first appearance at the Durham Public Health meeting. The following e-mail went unanswered and I never saw Kevin again, not even once:
To: Kevin.Buchholtz@dhhs.nc.gov
Date: Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:39 AM
Subject: We Are Coming For You.
Kevin,
Your duplicitous endorsement of Fluoride is going to get you in trouble someday.
To Rebecca’s credit she may have one-uped Kevin with her defense of fluoridation so will be hearing from me likewise very soon. I must admit this was a tall order when it was Kevin Buchholtz who, in his own argument, made a tacit admission that FSA leeches lead from pipe systems and gave his own daughter fluorosis.
Rebecca King’s defense of fluoridation will no doubt be one for the books:
“We drink fluoridated water and the trace levels of fluoride return to the mouth in the saliva where it provides topical protection as teeth are continuously bathed by fluoride-rich saliva.”
In a wide-ranging 7.5 minute stream of complete bullshit, local pediatric dentist Tim Wright makes short work debunking hundreds of scientific studies without providing a solitary shred of evidence other than his own highly fluoridated opinion. His three main factors, “Safety, Effectiveness, & Cost” blatantly ignore the self evident ethical and legal problems with mass medication of the population which I point out in this article pursuant existing Federal Drug Administration Laws. As I expected Tim Wright did not offer his professional opinion, only his personal one, since he is licensed as a dentist and not qualified to answer questions about how drinking Hydrofluorosilicic Acid affects the human body.
I expected very little from Timothy the moment I recognized him on the panel.
First – I always take offense when someone as FAT as Tim Wright lectures me about why I should be forced to drink fluoride when he is clearly so reckless with his own body.
Secondly – It immediately occurred to me that he was the one lone doofus defending fluoride in my WTVD report!
According to my sources most people turned down the opportunity to appear on TV in support of Fluoride but Tim Wright volunteered himself. This leads me to believe he is either monetarily invested in the perpetuation of fluoridation or he has constructed such an identity with fluoride through his misguided academic work that he is willing to defend it in a public forum rather than admit the bitter truth.
Before the meeting began I heard Tim Wright whisper to a colleague, “Are you ready to do battle?” as if he is on some kind of team. Timothy – if you really want to do battle and seem to be so wrapped up in pushing fluoride then you should debate me in a public forum on Water Fluoridation. I don’t even need the pretense of being a dentist in order to deconstruct your silly arguments.
Using sweeping generalizations and vague dictums Tim Wright in a most blanket manner discredits ALLscientific criticisms of fluoride ingestion but later admits that “we know fluoride is hazardous in high levels.”
Well Tim, if this fact is known even by the expert panel chosen to defend fluoridation then it is no surprise that the science of DOSAGE is completely lost on your humble mind.
When considering Fluoridation as a preventative medicine via ingestion the key factor which is incredibly lost on these dense people is not whether Fluoride is equitably delivered to the water…The most important factor is the equitable distribution to our human bodies!!
In decades of academic study has it never occurred to this imbecile that we all will naturally drink more or less water than one another?
These most basic facts are either totally lost on Timothy Wright or he is so blinded by his academic brainwashing that he refuses to see how outdated and discredited his perspective has become. Sooner or later the bitter reality will catch up to Dr. Wright and I hope at that point he will offer a public apology to me and everyone else he taught in his ventures as a professor.
I can tell you that I am already waiting for it.
Laura Gerald
The North Carolina State Director of Public Health was apparently too busy on the 14th to attend and defend fluoridation so I will dedicate very little space debating her vapid and empty written statements. One only has to listen to Rebecca King read the redundant words of Laura Gerald to know instantly which agency’s script is being repeated ad nauseam. Laura’s statements share stunning similarity to Rebecca and Kevin Buchholtz’ testimony so can only be taken as more personal opinions from the peanut gallery. When are these people going to wake up and realize that they are just another person born on the planet like you and me?
I will say that there was a hilarious though pathetic effort made by Director of the Health Board Gayle Harris to use Laura’s African ethnicity as a way to legitimize or somehow overpower past statements made by me in September 2012.
My statements which were referenced previously in this report alluded to civil rights activists Bernice & Alveda King MLK Jr’s Relatives) who condemned community water fluoridation in numerous public statements. If you actually listen to what I say the statements were clearly meant as encouragement to the board to stand on the side of civil rights and social justice, not necessarily because those people were black. By this metric it’s ironically Gayle Harris who is using the race card, whilst reflecting that inner truth on to me by insinuating I made some kind of “assertion” about black people.
Listen below as Health Board Chair Gayle Harris states with pride that Laura is “African American” which somehow must grant her magical powers that make fluoridation a healthy proposition:
The Culminating Event
I did not last very long in the question and answer period. I began to notice some legitimate questions being asked but no legitimate answers being offered in return. I could easily see the deception playing out before me which framed this substance FSA as an inert & natural substance.
The first such question was posed by James Miller, who asked Amy Keyworth if groundwater fluoride was the same substance that is added to Durham’s drinking water.
Her response was that Fluoride is an ion – so therefore it uniformly exists wherever it is found naturally. This might be true in her area of expertise but her lack of contextual information on the policy of water fluoridation is exposed instantly when she and the other experts nods her head “yes” to the question.
The bitter truth which the council hates me repeating is that our city forces each citizen to pay for a Class 8 Corrosive Substance, the waste product filtered off the smoke stacks of phosphate manufacturing, bled at a consistent rate of 1 ppm directly into your drinking water for over 60 years. When one calculates the actual damage done by this practice, it can only be considered a crime against humanity.
The Aftermath
Since I was forced to leave the building and not return, I only had my girlfriend as a mole in the now private health board meeting to capture the event. Unfortunately at the time I was using her phone to record the sheriff escorting me out, so we do not have video or recordings of what ensued after I left. I have decided to dedicate a separate post to recount and detail what happened afterwards according to my girlfriend Charlee’s witness testimony. Stay tuned!
Tuesday March 5, 2013 marked my 7th attempt to encourage the Raleigh City Council to abandon the forced medication of the water supply with hazardous toxic waste products. If one were to obtain and analyze the Certificate of Analysis (fluoride), provided at request by your local water department as required by law, there is an excellent chance that you could trace the chain of custody for the toxic waste added to your water much as I did. In the case of the City of Raleigh the hexafluorosilicic acid, lead, arsenic, and other compounds which are purchased in bulk and added to the water supply under the term “fluoridation,” come from a company, with local offices in Waxhaw, NC, called Key Chemical, Inc. The folks at Key Chemical obtain the toxic waste of PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. PCS Phosphate is the Aurora, NC mining facility/subsidiary of the world’s largest phosphate mining company, Potash Corporation.
While only $173,000 of the multi-billion dollar annual budget of the City of Raleigh is spent on the toxic waste they add to the water, the health effects (if ever properly assessed) could easily exceed the City’s budget. The City of Raleigh hides behind the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control, and other agencies well-known for the open-door policy between themselves and big business. Those agencies, associations, and organizations that support one another in an effort to diminish, undermine, and even ridicule the valid scientific evidence of harm from fluorides conjoin with government to ensure that the toxic waste of megalithic corporations are sold as a product instead of disposed of as a toxic waste. Thus, the City of Raleigh, and any municipality fluoridating the water supply are stewards of big business’s bottom line and not of the health of your teeth. Fluoridation is a criminal scheme that ensures the availability of revenue-generating filtration systems for the toxic waste of companies like, Potash Corporation. The filter is YOU!
When exploring the links between big business and government in regards to toxic waste disposal, one begins to notice the obvious interconnectivity of large-scale initiatives with local government and big business. Locally, here in North Carolina, PCS Phosphate’s mining operation threatens a $1billion per year fishing industry (on the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound). PCS Phosphate has even pushed for and received permission from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality to begin the “largest destruction of wetlands in the state’s history.” That permit is being challenged by the Southern Environmental Law Center http://www.southernenvironment.org/cases/pcs_phosphate_mine . The fact that government would permit such wanton destruction while, simultaneously, claiming to be stewards of the environment is laughable, at best.
Just so we are all up to speed, we have a Raleigh City Council that hides behind the NCDHHS in order to put toxic waste in the water, a phosphate mining company that hides behind the NCDWQ in order to destroy a larger swath of North Carolina’s coastal wetlands than has ever occurred in history, and a foreign company (Potash Corporation) that seems to have the power to make rational people accept these atrocities. Could there be a larger connection?
We are a 21st Century City of Innovation focusing on environmental, cultural and economic sustainability.
We conserve and protect our environmental resources through best practices and cutting edge conservation and stewardship, land use, infrastructure and building technologies.
We welcome growth and diversity through policies and programs that will protect, preserve and enhance Raleigh’s existing neighborhoods, natural amenities, rich history, and cultural and human resources for future generations.
We lead to develop an improved neighborhood quality of life and standard of living for all our citizens.
We work with our universities, colleges, citizens and regional partners to promote emerging technologies, create new job opportunities and cultivate local businesses and entrepreneurs.
We recruit and train a 21st Century staff with the knowledge and skill sets to carry out this mission, through transparent civic engagement and providing the very best customer service to our current citizens in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.
One wonders what is sustainable about putting Potash Corporation’s toxic waste in the water produced by the City of Raleigh? This is a question that can only be answered by those advocating or protecting the policy, and as can be seen from the video of myself asking that question, the Raleigh City Council just aren’t talking.
However, the question of why the Raleigh City Council can claim stewardship and protection of the environment as their mission while, simultaneously, dumping toxic waste in the water can be answered simply by reading their Mission Statement and then analyzing their associations.
Potash Corporation and the City of Raleigh are interconnected through the United Nations Agenda 21. After all, Raleigh is a 21st Century City and a member of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. Potash Corporation is a member of the Global Mining Initiative, which developed an action plan with the International Institute of Environment and Development. That UN Agenda 21 action plan is to be implemented by the International Council on Mining and Metals. The United Nations Environment Programme International Fertilizer Industry Association publication, “Environmental Aspects of Phosphate and Potash Mining,” makes it quite clear on page 9 http://www.elaw.org/system/files/PotashMining.pdf .
The UN Agenda 21 local action plan is to be implemented through the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), of which the City of Raleigh is a dues paying member and from which, in violation of the Constitution of the United States, the City of Raleigh receives her marching orders in terms of land use, smart growth, urban growth boundaries, and numerous other public policies… including water. Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution makes it illegal for any state or local official to enter any “Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation.” ICLEI’s mandate is “to build an active and committed municipal membership of local spheres of government (local and regional governments and authorities) as well as international, regional, national and sub-national local government associations.” Thus, membership in ICLEI serves as an unconstitutional alliance under Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution.
What could make your local governing body violate the United States Constitution while knowingly poison its citizens? What could make your state government agencies, chartered to protect the environment and resources, allow to occur the largest destruction of coastal wetlands in state history? What could provide the cover for big business and government collusion to proceed unchecked with destruction of the environment and the poisoning of human beings? What could possibly sell all of those absurdities as a legitimate push for environmental consciousness? The fascists at the United Nations, the fascists in business, and the fascists in your local government.
who live in Chapel Hill, NC, Durham, NC or Raleigh, NC
who like #Peace, #Activism, #Health, #Social change, #Social science or #Politics
I had hoped this would get the word out enough to inspire some extra voices to attend and support our effort but instead it produced a window into the awareness level of the general public. The fact that people are talking at all about this subject makes our effort easily a total success and the metrics support this conclusion as well:
However, what I have posted below is educational in and of itself, especially to those who are already awake to the fluoride deception. The comments garnered are from the original DAF post on facebook and secondly the comments seen on the clear main antagonist Jeff Shaw’s own public Facebook page. Antagonist is a somewhat harsh word, if he were not so dismissive and rude on the assumed privacy of his not-private Facebook page. What transpires is yielding for everyone as Jeff and his FB friends discuss public water fluoridation. Thankfully a couple seem to call Jeff’s bluff and this is no doubt beneficial to our case thanks to Jeff’s self evidently poor understanding of the issue. When the true naysayers stop talking, you can bet we are close to critical mass.
What is truly frustrating about battling fluoride is that the very symptoms of overexposure (decrease in Intelligence Quotient) literally prevents a certain portion of the population from making the neural connections necessary to understand the totality of the evidence. In other words – Fluoride makes you too dumb to realize fluoride is making you dumb! Forge ahead and you will see what I mean…
Joel Dooris The more I find out about the history of how it got in water in the first place, the more I’m finding we can’t take it out. It had ZERO to do with teeth, dental health was just a great side effect so they marketed to that.
Jeff Shaw Yes, I believe the CDC. Yes, I believe overexposure can be an issue. But you can’t just look at one issue in isolation: CDC (and basically every legitimate scientific organization) say that, despite any potential problems, fluoridation is on balance beneficial.
Doctors also acknowledge that some people are sensitive to vaccines. This is not an argument against vaccination.
Joel Dooris Have you done the research yourself on this subject, or are you just basing it on what you’ve been told? I’m sorry if that seems an upsetting question, but because someone else asked me that question it pissed me off enough to actually go and look it up. Now I ask you to do the same.
Durham Against Fluoride Jeff, do you agree that our water plant should medicate the water supply? How do you measure dosage? Don’t you need a prescription from a doctor in order to receive medicine? Also YOU are the one my friend taking CDC’s statement in isolation, and are flat out wrong that every “legitimate” scientific organization say Fluoride is beneficial. Did you read the meta analysis produced by Harvard? If not perhaps you are on the losing side of the argument:
Jeff Shaw I’ll make a bet with you. Why don’t we call CDC *right now* and ask them whether fluoride is on-balance beneficial? This would seem to resolve the question of which one of us is taking their view in isolation, right?
Terms of the bet: if you win, I will admit I was wrong. If I win, you take down the page. Fair enough, right? I’ll even throw in a donation to a charity of your choice if I lose.
(And I’ve read the Harvard stuff, yeah. 1. They only conclude we need more studies (which I’ll never say no to, we can always learn more), and 2. I think their methodology is flawed anyway.)
Durham Against Fluoride Sadly Jeff the CDC is not the final say. You would win the bet, because the CDC is invested in the perpetuation of this policy…Unlike you I like to think for myself and don’t take my cues from a singular agency. I can make a decision based on a comprehensive analysis of the data. I got a better bet for you – since you’re so passionate about this and apparently know enough to argue about it on my page and yours, why don’t you face me in a skype debate on the topic, and I will post on my site and you can present to your entire facebook friend list and we will see who’s information/argument is better received?
Jeff Shaw Forget the CDC. (Which is not “a singular agency,” but whatever.) There is no credible scientific organization that is opposed to fluoride. These are the people that actually engage in comprehensive data analysis. Sure, there are people that want more studies to achieve optimal health policy, as well they should, but no one thinks it’s been on-balance a problem.
(Also, that WTVD story is the worst, least scientific bit of reporting I’ve seen from a mainstream news agency. I award the journalist no points, and may God have mercy on his soul.)
Look, you bought Facebook ads to spread this nonsense or else I never would have seen it. I grew up in two areas without fluoride and my teeth are terrible: I don’t want that to happen to another generation of kids, so I commented.
But this has taken up enough of my time. Anyone that buys this stuff I’m not going to convince anyway. You have a nice day now.
Durham Against Fluoride What about the debate Jeff? your anecdotal evidence that you have bad teeth and grew up without fluoride added to your water doesn’t scientifically prove anything nor does it justify your assertion that we should systematically and forcibly medicate everyone via the drinking water. To reverse that, I grew up fluoridated and I have terrible teeth but I don’t use that as an argument. Anyhow it’s pretty clear you don’t know enough on this subject to engage in a 2-way conversation about it, let alone a debate, so just remember you were exposed to this information when it is revealed how wrong you were.
Joel Dooris “I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effects on a long range basis. Any attempt to use water this way is deplorable.” – Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, Past President of the American Medical Association.
AMA isn’t probably what you’d consider a credible scientific organization.
Joel Dooris “E.P.A. should act immediately to protect the public, not just on the cancer data, but on the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis, mutagenicity and other effects.” – Dr. William Marcus, Senior Toxicologist at E.P.A.
Joel Dooris Oh by the way most of the research libraries in the EPA are now closed to private citizens… so good luck getting any supporting data. They used to be open for anyone!
Melissa Jane Hobbs Oh, and did you know that “sonograms might cause autism?” That’s a random gem I picked up a few weeks ago from some chick who works at the mall. I’m like, uh, dude, first of all, a sonogram is a PRINTOUT of an ultrasound. I don’t think a piece of paper is going to make your kid have autism. And second of all, WHAT.
Jonathan Helfgott I still blame every single one of my cavities on the unholy alliance between the all-natural lefties and the anti-government lunatic fringe right wingers that kept fluoride out of Bellingham my entire childhood (and continues to to this day as far as I know).
Melissa Jane Hobbs OMG, a different facebook friend of mine just posted the stupidest thing I have seen in a long time… some crap about Merck putting “cancer viruses” in their vaccines. WHAT??? Yeah, I’m sure that’s true. *rolls eyes*
Jeff Shaw My well-meaning hippie vegan lesbian dog food store owning ladies in Bellingham once got legitimately angry at me for supporting fluoride. I had to find a new place to buy food from Russell and penny.
Chris Weld This is your best post ever. As the husband of a dentist, I will point out that people like this will be funding my children’s college education one day.
Jeff Shaw I have three other meta-comments about the Harvard stuff before I take the dogs for a walk:
1. They conclude we need more studies, which I’ll never say no to, and
2. They conclude that there is probably an optimal level of fluoridation, which of course there is, and (most importantly)
3. It is unwise to take any one study, even a study that aggregates data, and draw conclusions from it. Anyone can find one study that might suggest caution or skepticism on an issue, because a) there are a lot of studies out there and b) caution, skepticism and further study are rarely bad.
But don’t lose the forest when you’re looking at a tree. I can find a study in two minutes urging more study on global warming, or on vaccine safety. That doesn’t mean the larger argument isn’t settled.
Thomas Nadelhoffer Jeff, I am surprised by your confidence! I provided a link to a study which showed that there are health risks associated with the consumption of flouride (especially in children). The response developed in the editorial you posted (which is poorly argued and not especially well balanced, I might add) seems to miss the point. Insofar as it is well established that flouride can be harmful at higher doses, the onus is on the pro-flouride group to provide data that it is safe at the level they’re advocating (assuming, of course, that the burden is always on the person who advocates a potentially harmful practice). Have you seen such a study? I haven’t (but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any).
Adam Raymond That’s really cool that you posted this. I heard the headline from the Harvard study showing that high levels of flouride can lower your IQ on NPR a couple of weeks ago, but I hadn’t had time to actually investigate.
Make your voice heard at the new “My Raleigh Ideas” website where citizens have demanded to stop the medication of their public water supply. Register at the link below and vote this idea up!
The citizens of Raleigh who pay municipal water bills spend more than $100,000 dollars per year on adding medication to the water supply. The “medication” is called Hexafluorosilicic acid, commonly known as Fluoride and has been added to the water supply by majority vote since the 1950′s.
Since that time numerous studies have shown that even moderate levels of exposure to fluoride can lead to lower IQ (Intelligence Quotient), thyroid malfunction, brittle bones, early arthritis, dental fluorosis (white spotting of the teeth), and even cancer.
On July 24, 2012 Harvard released a study in the Federal Government Journal concluding Fluoride lowers IQ. (Source: Reuters) Choi et al write:
“The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas,” write Choi et al.
Further, the Environmental Protection Agency says fluoride is a chemical “with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity” and In 2011 the EPA reversed it’s longstanding claim that public water fluoridation was one of the public health breakthroughs in the 20th century. Then offering advise to municipalities to lower the base amount of fluoride added to their water. (Source)
Do yourself a favor and URGE the City to STOP fluoridating the public water supply! The reasons are very clear:
The City and citizens can save $100,000 per year by not having to purchase the chemical
Citizens will no longer face the risk of suffering Fluoride toxicity, an ailment that can lead to numerous documented medical and neurological disorders
Mothers who feed their baby’s formula will be able to use Tap water without fear of overexposing the children to fluoride
The City can put that 100,000 dollars to something more healthy and beneficial to the population
As you may already know the fight to put a stop to the unhealthy practice of public water fluoridation pushes onward.
Last month we had a great turn out at the Durham County Public Health Hearing where citizens and activists stood in unison to urge our county health officials to recommend our city council put a stop to this madness. As promised, WTVD Channel 11 showed up to capture those who spoke up on video. This footage will be used in an investigative report due to air this November on the issue of Fluoridating public water. The monday after our meeting, I sat down with anchor Steve Daniels to discuss the whys and hows of this issue. I am pleased to report that WTVD is preparing a great informative report that is sure to bring incredible awareness to this issue.
We already had great success in making our voices heard last month and was promised by the county health board that they would form a subcommittee in order to review the evidence which supports our position against Fluoridation.
Unfortunately, almost 1 month later my sources say that the county health board has reneged on their promise and so far have not taken ANY action to form a subcommittee to formally review the evidence we are presenting.
While discouraging, now is NOT the time to give up – rather – now is the perfect time to show our civil servants that WE MEAN BUSINESS!
Thursday October 18th @ 5:00 PM there will be another county health board meeting and I am planning to show up and hold them accountable! Me and a few other activists are planning on using our allotted speaking time to play a short informational piece on Fluoridation, and to ask them politely why they have not looked more thoroughly into this issue. Afterall, it’s our HEALTH that is at risk!
statements, first, notice that there is no mention of concentration levels of fluoride, simply the implication that the mere presence of fluoride at any concentration will “hamper brain development”. There is no substance known to man which is not toxic at improper levels, including plain water. Fluoride is certainly no exception. Concentration level is the difference between safety and toxicity of ANY substance we ingest. Water is fluoridated at the minuscule concentration of 0.7 ppm. At this concentration it is not toxic. If you care to dispute this elementary fact then provide valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support your claim. Keep in mind that the antifluoridationist websites, and blogs on which you solely rely for your “information” do not qualify as valid sources.
Medicated Water Supply
DURHAM AGAINST FLUORIDE 