From: “Ted Noftall” <Ted@TedNoftall.com>
To:”Bob Ford” <firstname.lastname@example.org> “Dennis Kennedy” <DennisK@port-orange.org> email@example.com “Drew Bastian” <firstname.lastname@example.org> “Allen Green” <AllenG@port-orange.org>
Cc:”Greg Kisela” <email@example.com>
Mayor and Counsel,
Unless your Manager and his Utilities director have been instructed to present a biased view in favor of continuing Fluoridation of the Port Orange water supply you are not being well served in the decision before you because all they have presented for your consideration are 2 highly biased bullet point presentations – one of which the authorship cannot even be determined. They have provided zero product safety information on the Fluoride they are purchasing, , and zero information on any product testing they conduct on site or any quality control features of the delivery system they employ at the water plant. Councilman Ford needs to get our and purchase 5 mushroom awards in time for this evening’s meeting.
The health benefits and risks from water Fluoridation is far from settled science. Irrespective of the decision that is made, you and by extension the residents of Port Orange deserve to receive a balanced presentation which would include hearing from independent scientists at such places as the American College of Toxicology, the Association for Science in the Public Interest, and the EPA whose studies have concluded that there are serious health risks associated with the prolonged ingestion of Fluoride.
When we speak of Fluoride we are generally speaking of manufactured Fluoride of which there are two grades;
- * pharmaceutical grade Fluoride used by dentists and found in anti-cavity Fluoride rinse and toothpaste typical product warnings such as “ keep out of reach of children. Do not swallow the rinse. Do not eat or drink for 30minutes after rinsing. If more than used for rinsing or brushing is accidentally swallowed, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately “. The fluoride in half a tube of toothpaste can kill a child. Fuoridated mouth rinse and toothpaste when assembled in pallet sized quantities or larger carry the skull and crossbones poison symbol.
- ** and an un-purified industrial grade Fluoride that is a by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry captured by wet scrubbing systems as part of that industries air pollution protocol that could only be disposed of a great cost to that industry, were it not for the pesticide market and municipal water supplies. Fluoride is a very potent poison. It is a registered pesticide, used for killing rats and mice. By law is can only disposed of in class-one landfills, OR in the water supplies of Municipalities willing to pay upwards of $ 500 a ton for a by-product that cost manufactures approximately $300 per ton to dispose of in those landfills.
It is little wonder that the phosphate fertilizer industry has been generous benefactors for grants to governments wishing to upgrade or install new fluoride dispensing equipment. According to the Utilities memorandum Port Orange has received a $30,829 grant for just this purpose.
Manufactured substances intended to treat or prevent human illness (including tooth decay) are by definition drugs which are mandated by Congress to be regulated by the Food and Drug administration (FDA). While the FDA has never approved any Fluoride product designed for ingestion as safe or effective and is eerily silent of the practice of adding Fluoride to municipal drinking systems, it has been remiss in not regulating in not regulating its use. The power of the Fluoridation lobbying effort is such that the EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Fluoride at 4.0PPM ( Parts Per Million ) is several hundred times more lenient than for other contaminants of equal or less toxicity such as Lead and Mercury. I can find no EPA source document indicating that “the optimal [fluoride]level of .7ppm PPM is recommended by the U.S.EPA “ as is stated in the memorandum prepared by the Utilities department.
A public drinking water supply is a public resource essential to life and health. Drinking water additives intended to make water safe from microbiologic contaminants and to treat water to control corrosion and other physical properties of the water are accepted. However, the deliberate addition to drinking water of a substance intended to treat or prevent human illness in an entire population is highly unethical because individuals are not being asked for their informed consent — which is standard practice for all medications.
ACCORDINGLY I would inquire as to the following basic safeguards:
Shouldn’t any person or entity wishing to add any substance to a public drinking water supply with the intent to treat or prevent human illness be required to provide proof that the substance is specifically approved by a reputable health agency such as the FDA for safety and effectiveness with a margin of safety that is protective against all adverse health effects at all dosage ranges consistent with unrestricted human water consumption.
Shouldn’t any substance which is added with the intention of treating people, not the water, be required to meet health- based standards which protect the entire population, including infants, the infirm and the elderly over their lifetime.
Shouldn’t each shipment of the Fluoride being placed in our water supply be required to include its own certificate of independent analysis provided by the manufacturer, producer, or supplier detailing all detectable containments such as arsenic, lead, barium, cadmium and mercury .
Even the scantest of Google searches yields a ton of scientific research decrying that Fluoride is the most reactive and bone seeking element yet discovered, and linking it to a plethora of medical conditions from dental and skeletal fluorosis to arthritic, brain, IQ, pineal, thyroid and reproductive ailments, while noting that areas that do nor fluoridate water supplies, or have discontinuer fluoridation have no greater instance of dental caries than other areas that continue to fluoridate.
Absent from that Google search and from open debate however is any meaningful defense of fluoridation by its proponents who have rather uniformly adopted a position as explained by a prominent lobbyist for fluoridation that “ debates give the illusion that a scientific controversy exists when no credible people support the fluorophobics view “. which has caused an unsure and self doubting political stance [such as you are likely to endorse at this evening’s meeting] to evolve into little more than a dogmatic, authoritarian, essentially anti scientific posture resistant to change.
Reduced dental caries associated with the use of Fluoride is not dependent on water fluoridation. Fluoride can be found naturally occurring in Florida water at approximately 2PPM and in toothpaste, mouth rinse, dental treatments, fluoride pills, juice, soft drinks, canned food and commercial fruit and vegetables for those who choose to use those products.
Discontinuing placing a highly toxic poison in our water supply that is not designed to improve the quality of the water but rather administer a drug to individuals without their consent should be no brainer. The medical safeguards including eliminating dosage in infants and controlling dosage in others are simply not in place.
Thank you for your consideration.
From: Ted Noftall [mailto:Ted@TedNoftall.com]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 7:32 PM
Subject: Fluoridation — 10-22-2013 Counsel Agenda
Good evening Jason,
Candid answers to the following questions would be a great help to Council in answering the Fluoridation policy question before them at tomorrow evening’s meeting.
- 1) Is Utilities recommending, not recommending, or taking no position on whether Fluoride should be added to the Port Orange water supply.
- 2) Is the Fluoride that Utilities is adding to the City’s water supply a pharmaceutical grade product.
- 3) Do one or more of the product data sheets that accompanies the Fluoride that is being placed in the City’s drinking supply contain the following disclaimers.
“……. NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR ANY OTHER WARRANTY IS EXPRESSED OR IS IMPLIED REGARDING THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THIS INFORMATION, THE RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THIS INFORMATION OR THE PRODUCT, THE SAFETY OF THIS PRODUCT, OR THE HAZARDS RELATED TO ITS USE. THIS INFORMATION AND PRODUCT ARE FURNISHER ON THE CONDITION THAT THE PERSON RECEIVING THEM SHALL MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION AS TO THE SUITABILITY OF THE PRODUCT FOR THEIR PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND ON THE CONDITION THEY ASSUME THE RISK OF THEIR USE THEREOF……..”
“ PROLONGED OR REPEATED OVEREXPOSURE TO FLUORIDE COMPOUNDS MAY CAUSE FLUOROSIS. FLUOROSIS IS CHARACTERIZED BY SKELETAL CHANGES, CONSISTING OF OSTEOSCLEROSIS (HARDENING OR ABNORMAL DENSITY OF BONE) AND OSTEOMALACIA ( SOFTENING OF BONES ) AND BT MOTTLED DISCOLORATION OF THE ENAMEL OF THE TEETH ( IF EXPOSURE OCCURS DURING ENAMEL FORMATION ). SYMPTOMS MAY INCLUDE BONE AND JOINT PAIN AND LIMITED RANGE OF MOTION. CONDITIONS AGGRAVATED BY EXPOSURE MAY INCLUDE SKIN AND RESPIRATORY (ASTHMA) -LIKED DISORDERS “
“ HANDLE WITH EXTREME CARE ”
- 4) In light of the manufacturer’s warranty disclaimer can Utilities, advise as to what percent of the Fluoride batches it is purchasing are independently tested, AND supply the results of those inspections and test results attesting to the composition, safety and suitability of the specific Fluoride being placed in the City’s drinking supply, AND FURTHER advise as to the analysis if any, that is performed at the water treatment plant prior injecting Fluoride into the water supply.
- 5) In light of the manufacturer’s FLUOROSIS warning, can Utilities produce any reputable independent studies that have concluded there are no health concerns associated with long term consumption of Fluoridated water.
- 6) Finally to place the toxicity of this product in perspective can Utilities outline the HazMat protocol procedures required to be followed if a tanker sized quantity of this Fluoride were accidently spilled along Dunlawton Ave .