Breaking news today at www.juneauempire.com Here’s the story: Juneau has been fluoridating city water since 1984. Three years ago, a group of concerned citizens approached our mayor, who put together a commission of doctors, engineers and public health officials. I was one of these commissioners. We studied the available literature in depth for 2 years, meeting at least once monthly. We developed a comprehensive report for the city assembly, which included an analysis of the recently published 506 page review on the toxicology of fluoride by the prestigious National Academy of Science. (www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571)

After reviewing our report, the assembly members of Juneau, Alaska voted among themselves 7 to 1 to stop fluoridating Juneau, acknowledging that the risks far outweigh the benefits. The fluoride was turned off on January 15 of this year. In February, a group of doctors and dentists mounted a campaign to get the fluoride put back in. They have raised $161,000 for their campaign; nearly $150,000 of which has come from the American Dental Association in Chicago Illinois. http://tinyurl.com/36d66s

Wow! $150,000. Think how many toothbrushes the ADA could have sent to Juneau for that sum! This impressive amount might also have paid for topical fluoride varnishes for all local elementary school kids for 5 years. Why have the pro-fluoride folks spent so much money to defend their increasingly indefensible stance? A few years ago the ADA spent $3000,000 in Bellingham, Washington to promote fluoridation. That didn’t work either. Why aren’t they putting that money into actual dental care for those who need it most? Instead, the funds have been used to buy signatures to mount a ballot initiative, to hire a PR firm to conduct two “push polls” (which are not about gathering information but are attempts to influence voters), and to inundate the media with slickly produced ads which contain outright lies, such as “Fluoride benefits everyone” and “fluoridated water reduces dental cavities by 20-40%.”

Juneau Citizens for Clean Water couldn’t compete against this kind of money, but we clearly had the hearts, minds and will of the people behind us. The vast majority of the letters to the editor and local radio polls have been anti-fluoride. The moment of truth is here, and it is sweet. We did use our resources (about $4,000) to mail informative postcards to the frequent voters. And, we brought Dr. Hardy Limeback all the way across the country from Toronto, Ontario, to present several public lectures. www.fluoridealert.org/news/2616.html

Dr. Limeback is currently the head of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, Ontario. He is considered the world’s foremost expert on dental fluorosis, a sign of excess fluoride ingestion. He was one of the prestigious scientists who contributed to the National Academy of Science March 2006 report on fluoride to the US Congress. In a nutshell, he no longer supports fluoridation of public water because of:

1. Lack of effectiveness.
2. Tooth decay rates have declined globally due to fluoridated toothpaste, improved diets and better awareness of dental health.
3. Fluoride only works topically to protect the dental enamel. There is no benefit whatsoever, and considerable evidence of harm, from ingesting fluoride. Most dentists still are not aware of this indisputable fact.
4. Half of all ingested fluoride remains in the skeletal system and accumulates with age.
5. Fluoride is an effective insecticide and works by destroying critical enzymes (G-proteins). This is how it negatively affects human health as well. For example, fluoride disrupts thyroid health by displacing iodine uptake in the thyroid gland and it also causes calcification of the pineal gland, which disregulates the pituitary gland, which is the master gland of the endocrine system. Pineal calcification is especially prevalent in teens, who are going through growth spurts. Fluoride accretes in bone, and bone turns over more rapidly during periods of growth. Who knows a teen with disrupted sleep habits? Fluoridated communities have higher rates of hip fractures, and higher rates of cancer.
6. Money saved from halting water fluoridation programs can be more wisely spent on public health education about diet and topical fluoride varnishes for those at risk for dental decay.

I had two pressing questions for Dr. Limeback.

Dr. Em: “Why are most dentists and doctors so entrenched in illogical and outdated thinking about fluoridation?

Dr. Limeback: “They are on a bandwagon. They have been parroting what the ADA and the AMA has been saying for decades. They don’t have time to really study the issue and read the contemporary studies. They band together to save face. They believe in their own authority. They spout claims like $1 worth of fluoridation saves $38 worth of dental care costs. This is nonsense. Fluoridated cities and non-fluoridated cities have very similar rates of dental decay. Fluoridation causes very expensive-to-fix staining (fluorosis) in at least 30% of those chronically exposed. I recently treated a teen for moderate fluorosis: at the end of the day his parents spent $17,000 on restoring his teeth to a normal appearance. Without fluoride in the water, maybe this kid would have had a half cavity more, which would have cost $200 to fix. Twenty percent caries reduction, in a mouth with 128 dental surfaces, amounts to 1/2 a cavity. So the 20% improvement claim sounds a lot better that it really is.

Further, 50% of 12 year olds today don’t have any cavities at all. This is largely because of fluoridated toothpaste, which was introduced in 1968. Many pro-fluoride folks will say that their kids’ teeth are so much better than their teeth, and this “proves” that fluoride in the water works. That’s not true at all. Fluoride is only beneficial to the dental enamel when applied topically. When fluoride is ingested, it actually weakens the inner structure of the teeth, making them more brittle. Don’t forget the ADA and the AMA are trade organizations. They make a lot of money endorsing drugs, including fluoride. These are not bodies of research scientists.”

Dr. Em: “I’ve heard the CDC is pushing right now for a federal mandate to fluoridate all communities larger than 10,000. Why? And why is the ADA pumping so much money into little Juneau, Alaska?

Dr. Limeback: “OK. You have to turn off the tape recorder here. (Dr. Em paraphrases: ) Follow the money. Dentists, and many doctors, largely stand to lose plenty of income when they serve Medicaid and Medicare patients. When dentists buy into the idea that fluoride cures dental decay, they can justify refusing to see patients who can’t afford the big bills, or don’t have insurance. It’s shocking, but true, that Medicaid and Medicare don’t pay for any kind of dental health. Dentists would prefer to pay dues to their trade organization to promote the idea that fluoridation is the most important solution for healthy teeth. The ADA puts its stamp of approval on that image of the triple-swirl of toothpaste on the side of the toothpaste box.”

By the way, a toddler swallowing a glob of toothpaste that big could die. Even though the CDC now concedes, and has reprimanded the ADA of such, that only a pea sized blob of toothpaste is safe, marginally, if accidentally swallowed. A pea-sized blob of toothpaste has an equivalent amount of fluoride as a litre of water. Think about this: a little blob of toothpaste comes with a warning on the box: may be harmful if swallowed; call your poison control center immediately. But, no such warnings exist on your glass of water, even though a mere 2 big glasses of fluoridated tap water deliver about the same toxic dose. One part-per-million (1 ppm), which is widely considered the “optimal” fluoridation dose for water, delivers 1 gram of fluoride per litre of water. Teas, especially green tea, juices, especially grape juices, and most canned foods are very high, containing concentrated fluoride. It`s easy to get way more than the “optimal dose” daily.

Juneau says no to fluoride – Proposition fails 61 to 37 percent

Juneau’s voters delivered a resounding “no” to fluoridating the city’s water supplies on Tuesday, putting an end, for now, to one of the most hotly contested and expensive ballot initiatives in the city’s history.

Preliminary vote counts showed Proposition 2 failed 61 to 37 percent. Of 24,613 registered voters, 7,820 voted at the polls. Another 1,500 absentee ballots and 600 questioned ballots remain to be counted. The Juneau city clerk’s office plans to certify the final count by next Tuesday.

“There’s a lot of smart people in Juneau and they understood the issue very well and it was reflected in the result at the polls,” said David Ottoson, owner of Rainbow Foods and member of the anti-fluoridation group Juneau Citizens for Safe Water.

Karen Lawfer, spokeswoman for the pro-fluoridation group Citizens Promoting Dental Health, said she was disappointed and that there was a “fear factor” at the polls Tuesday.

“A lot of people, oftentimes, they vote with fear, and I can understand that,” Lawfer said. “We won’t see the fallout of this for another couple of years when people see the decline in dental health.”

Ottoson said there are better ways to deliver fluoride to those who aren’t getting it.

“Everybody wants our kids to have healthy teeth, and there’s other ways to do that besides putting it in the water,” Ottoson said.

As for the American Dental Association, which funded most of the pro-fluoridation’s $151,000 campaign, Ottoson said he hopes the group will continue its involvement in this community past this election.

“We’d like to see them participating in some of these other solutions. That (money) could have bought a lot of fluoride varnishes, and fluoridated toothpaste for people who can’t afford it,” Ottoson said.

Dr. Emily Kane said she hopes the community “can work together to repair the rift” caused by this election.

“Our common interest in improved dental hygiene supersedes our differences in approach,” Kane said.

Kane practices naturopathic medicine and is starting a task force to reinstate a program that will provide fluoride varnishes for kids.

Fluoride was taken out of the city’s water supply last year after the Juneau Assembly voted against it. They acted on the recommendations of a city commission that studied the issue for two years.

Mayor Bruce Botelho said he expects to see the issue of providing more dental care through the schools to come before the Juneau Assembly in the next few weeks.

The American Dental Association (ADA) is a trade organization, whose money comes from member dues, and, largely, from endorsements.  Their biggest endorsement is the ADA “seal of approval” on fluoridated toothpaste (which I have no argument with: fluoride does work topically to harden the dental enamel of those at risk for cavities).  Some people construe that the ADA supports fluoridation in any form.  However, the ADA has very clearly stated that fluoride is BAD for infants, and that formula-fed infants should ONLY consume formula mixed with unfluoridated bottled water.   How much sense does that make?  Dental caries is largely a socio-economic disease.  Dentists don’t like to service Medicaid patients.  The poor are much more likely to suffer from caries.  How likely is it that they will buy bottled water to mix with their baby formula?  So, let’s be clear about the claims:  the ADA ensorses fluoride — it is NOT a body of research scientists and it most certainly has no credentials as a group toxicology experts.  The definitive fluoride toxicology study, a 506 page document published in March of 2006 by the National Academy of Science (the United Nations of scientists) National Research council, is a compilation of all the available and credible evidence on the toxicology of fluoride.  Twelve high level, hand-picked, elite research scientists spent 3 years looking at all the research on fluoride, and cited those studies that met strict criteria: peer-reviewed, published documentation of fluoride damage to brain and nerves, the immune system, the endocrine system (particularly the thyroid gland), the renal system and the skeletal system.  The results are sobering and a strong recommendation against mass fluoridation.

http://www.fluorideresearch.org/393/files/FJ2006_v39_n3_p163-172.pdf

Fluoridation proponents fret that dental decay will skyrocket once the (absurd) practice of community water fluoridation ceases.  Here are five peer-reviewed studies which proove that, in communities who ceased fluoridation, no increase in dental decay rates was observed.  In fact, in 4 out of 5, decay rates improved!  I challenge fluoridation proponents to find compelling, recent, evidence that cessation of fluoridation actually does wreak havoc on people’s teeth.

Kunzel W, Fischer T (2000). Caries prevalence after cessation of water fluoridation in La Salud, Cuba.  Caries Research 34:20-5

Kunzel W, Fischer T, Lorenz R, Bruhmann S (2000).  Decline of caries prevalence after the cessation of water fluoridation in the former East Germany.  Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 28:382-9

Seppa L, Karkkainen S, Hausen H (2000).  Caries Trends 1992-1998 in Two Low-Fluoride Finnish Towns Formerly With and Without Fluoridation.  Caries Research 34: 462-468

Burt BA, et al. (2000). The effects of a break in water fluoridation on the development of dental caries and fluorosis.  J Dent Res. 79(2):761-9

Maupome G, Clark DC, Levy SM, Berkowitz J (2001). Patterns of dental caries following the cessation of water fluoridation.  Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 29:37-47

Fluoridated water isn’t the answer to dental caries

When I joined the mayoral commission to study the issue of municipal water fluoridation in 2004, I was fairly certain adding fluoride to city water was not the best approach to dental health.

I also had some concerns about the ethics and safety of adding a medicine and waste product to the water system, which virtually forces everyone to consume, bathe in and breathe it. After three years of study, my stance has evolved to a deeper and more urgent level of concern.

For those who believe they, or their children, need fluoride – it’s everywhere! Almost all canned foods have high levels of fluoride. Virtually all toothpastes contain fluoride. Your dentist can apply fluoride to your teeth. Public health will give out sodium fluoride tablets and drops for free. Grapes, corn, chicken, fish, tea are all high in fluoride. Fluoride is not a necessary element for human life. In fact, in relatively small doses, it is toxic. Remember, fluoride accumulates. About 50 percent of all the fluoride you have ever ingested is still in your body and will remain there, in the bones, in the kidneys, in the brain and, yes, on your teeth. This is likely the way fluoride confers long-term damage to susceptible individuals.

Fluoridation advocates cite “60 years of public health research” to support the idea. About 60 years ago it was noted that areas of the country (Colorado and Texas) where aquifer-derived water was naturally high in fluoride, kids had more dental fluorosis (permanent dental staining) and, arguably, fewer cavities. This naturally occurring fluoride is calcium fluoride, which is almost insoluble, meaning it doesn’t bind well to internal tissues, such as bones and kidneys.

The soluble chemical, sodium fluoride, which is what is typically added to city water, is considered more toxic than lead and almost as toxic as arsenic, in comparable amounts. Sodium fluoride is 20 times more toxic than the naturally occurring calcium fluoride. The lethal dose for calcium fluoride in humans is 5,000 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. The lethal dose of sodium fluoride in humans is 250 mg per kg of body weight.

No studies on the toxicology of sodium fluoride in humans were undertaken at the beginning of the fluoridation experiment in 1945, nor have any such studies been conducted since.

Can you imagine our government in 2007 mandating the addition of another biologically active substance to everyone’s water supply – with no safety data, only marginal efficacy data and amidst a good deal of public protest? Can we learn anything from the fact that all of the European Union countries (except Ireland and parts of England) have rejected fluoridation?

Fluoridation proponents claim a 20 to 40 percent improvement in dental caries (cavities) rates in fluoridated cities. This is based on a small portion of one study of about 39,000 school children that followed dental caries rates in 1986-87. Only about 8,000 of these children fit the forgone conclusion (fluoridation is good), while the data from the other 31,000 children was rejected.

In reality, caries rates are no different in fluoridated versus nonfluoridated communities. To list just one (of many) references making this point is Yiamouyiannis JA (1990) “Water Fluoridation and Tooth Decay: Results from the 1986-87 National Survey of U.S. Schoolchildren,” Fluoride, 23, 55-67, which analyzes the data from all 39,000 children. Since 1990, 149 communities in North America (including Juneau) have discontinued fluoridation of their water.

Fluoride is clearly not the answer to dental caries. Overall, as oral hygiene has improved, the general trend for caries rates continues downward, regardless of fluoridation status. A huge amount of early childhood caries is caused by bottle feeding with high-sugar formula or juices, in which these sugary liquids sit on the teeth and literally make them rot. Sugary drinks also cause obesity and diabetes. Adding fluoride to the water is not the solution to any of our public health problems.

Part of the solution is to take as much personal responsibility for your health as possible. Stay informed and make choices. Please vote no to enforced fluoridation on Oct. 2.

Several dentists and public health workers are attempting, with American Dental Association funding, to gather the 2,000 signatures needed to put the fluoride issue on a ballot in October. While I believe that the citizens of Juneau would step up and vote the right way- to keep our water uncontaminated – as a member of the mayor’s fluoride commission who gave up many nights to research and meet on the issue of fluoridation, it makes me groan to think about going through this again.

Six members of the community, all professionals with many years of higher education, combed through all the available research we could find and hashed through the citations, casting aside conspiracy theories and strictly focusing on science. The mayor’s fluoride commission made a recommendation to the Juneau Assembly after more than two years of study. The Assembly, guided by our research, very sensibly voted to get fluoride out of Juneau’s water. Most of the developed world reached the same conclusion at least a decade ago.

Before signing this petition, please make sure you have studied the research, not just looked at the dogma on an ADA pamphlet. Fluoride is bad for people, especially young children. It is a hazardous waste product. It’s much better to take care of your teeth, and your children’s well-being (including dental health), by eating whole foods (not processed junk) and brushing or at least rinsing after every meal or snack.