General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsParanoid Township Board ends fluoridation of water.
Following a two-month debate, the township Board of Trustees voted 5-2 on Tuesday to stop adding fluoride to its water immediately. The township in Livingston County has 368 private water customers, several businesses and schools connected to the system.
Trustee Glenn Harper, who raised the issue, called fluoride a health hazard and said people should decide individually whether to use it. "We should not be making people's health decisions," he said, adding that fluoride supplements could be purchased cheaply.
The federal government has long called fluoridation one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th Century. But earlier this year, the government said a review suggested some Americans might be getting too much fluoride.
http://www.freep.com/article/20111222/NEWS05/112220461/Board-votes-to-end-fluoridation
Sirveri
(4,517 posts)Cause that's all that's going to end up happening from this.
SixthSense
(829 posts)it doesn't need to be in the water to get what you need for healthy teeth.
On the other side of the equation there are long-term risks that have never been adequately studied.
While flouridation may be a profitable way for aluminum manufacturers to dispose of waste product, it is not necessarily in the health interests of the people drinking it - flouride is more toxic than lead.
PCIntern
(25,490 posts)all the way around...
BTW, people who live in Colorado and Texas who have higher endemic fluoride content than 1 ppm, which is what is stipulated as additive amounts, don't have any greater risk of all the 'diseases and conditions' you're thinking of.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)RandySF
(58,511 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)That particular area in Michigan is only a generation or two removed from "Klan" activity.
Googling "KKK and 'Howell'/ Livingston County Michigan (same basic area as Hartland)" gives some scary insight into the historical mindset of the area.
In honesty the area has become more civilized over the course of the last couple of decades ... but , clearly the vestiges of ignorance rears its ugly head.
KT2000
(20,568 posts)It is long past time that we stop citizens being forced to drink hazardous waste. Those who want flouride can get it from other sources.
It is nearly impossible to find toothpaste that does not have fluoride.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Response to KT2000 (Reply #4)
Post removed
obamanut2012
(26,047 posts)Most of what they carry still doesn't have it. Target carries Tom's now. So does WAL-MART.
It's very easy to find toothpaste without fluoride.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)Have to look hard to find any without it.
It is a real PR achievement that we have made adding a byproduct of the aluminum industry to our water supplies such an untouchable success, and wanting to remove it such a kooky concept.
But I guess that's to be expected when we have aluminum in most of our deodorants and now in some cosmetics like foundation and powder.
KT2000
(20,568 posts)Most of their toothpaste has fluoride. In my area, there is only one of their's that does not have it and only one store carries that one.
TygrBright
(20,755 posts)StarsInHerHair
(2,125 posts)"There are four categories of byproduct material as defined in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended:
Radioactive material that results from the production or use of special nuclear material (enriched uranium or plutonium) in nuclear reactors. Examples include cobalt-60, cesium-137, and iridium-192.
Tailings or wastes produced by the extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium (source material) from ore.
Discrete sources of radium-226 or material made radioactive by use of a particle accelerator that is produced, extracted or converted after extraction for a commercial, medical or research activity. Examples include fluoride-18, cobalt-57, and iodine-123.
Any discrete source of naturally occurring radioactive material (other than source material) that the Commission determines could pose a public health and safety or common defense and security threat similar to that of a discrete source of radium-226."
"
Confusious
(8,317 posts)which is an element. It is not radioactive.
What you have there is an ISOTOPE of Flourine which is rare.
The statement "Flouride comes from bombs" lends nothing but fear based on a false premise, That being, that all Flouride is radioactive.
obamanut2012
(26,047 posts)WTF?
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)Please
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)But then I remembered that the John Birch society didn't object to fluoride because they thought it was a health risk. They objected because they thought it was a Communist mind control plot!
Overseas
(12,121 posts)chemicals to add to the large assortment we ingest on a daily basis.
It is hard to find toothpaste without flouride, even though my water already has it. At least I thought I could reduce the amount of fluoride I got by choosing toothpaste without it but that is nearly impossible.
Ditto on finding deodorant without aluminum. I have found some that works, but not in my regular drugstore.
I ingest lots of other chemicals in my cosmetics, my water, my food and my air.
I'm sorry that this issue has been promoted by kooks so we are no longer allowed to discuss it without being lumped in with them. But it certainly is convenient for the aluminum industry.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)scientifically credible, peer reviewed research that has ever concluded that there are any unintended health risks caused by fluoridation? It does not sound implausible that fluoridation might conceivably have some negative side effects. But given that the anti-fluoridation movement from the very beginning was led almost entirely by John Birchers and other conspiracy nuts - if there are any legitimate health concerns regarding fluoridation it would be hard to get a fair and impartial review.
Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #13)
Tesha This message was self-deleted by its author.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)This is an affluent county that has often ranked in the top ten wealthiest. I was stunned to learn this when I moved here from Indiana in 1972. However, looking for a link to see if that were still the case, I found this interesting summary for NJ. In addition to listing where fluoride was added, they have a chart showing the natural level of fluoride - and the two collection points in Morris County show it is acceptable. http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/flouride_pws_8_08.pdf
My husband, my kids and I got the semi annual fluoride treatment at the dentist.
It might be that the town either had people, who were diagnosed as getting too much fluoride in their water or they tested the water and it was not needed. It might also be that there are better ways to get the right level if the level is too low in the water. (One question I have is whether various in house water treatment solutions filter the fluoride out.)
Overseas
(12,121 posts)They are very expensive.
Maine-ah
(9,902 posts)growing up...heck I didn't even go to the dentist until I was in my 20's. One cavity, and at 37 years of age, I still only have that one filling. Fluoride should be used topically, you don't need to swallow it for it's benefits. Even the CDC says that.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm
Zorra
(27,670 posts)well water right out of the ground, or purified water when not at home, except for very occasional emergency tap water when I was desperate and nothing else was available.
Anyway, I still have all my teeth, and the kids never got but a very few minor cavities.
Don't know the reason for this, could be that the water we drank had natural fluoride in it.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)I haven't had a cavity since I was about 17 years old. My teeth are in great shape, so I'm not really sure about the benefits.
obamanut2012
(26,047 posts)And, I have a mouthful of fillings from my youth showing the results of that. Friends my age raised on fluoride-added water have few if any fillings.
Those large fillings have caused molars to crack and crowns to be put on.
Maine-ah
(9,902 posts)those of us who grew up with well and springs that have no added fluoride, and don't have cavities? I have one, my brother who is 43 has none.
malthaussen
(17,175 posts)... then questions about consumption of sugar, carbonated beverages, etc, etc. But anecdotal evidence is not data. I'm sure, for those who care, there have been numerous studies of the issue. I don't care, so I don't have links...
-- Mal
Maine-ah
(9,902 posts)that it could be the same for those that have cavities that grew up with out fluoride added to their water. Then there are those who grew up with fluoride and have plenty of cavities. I will add that I also grew up on raw milk, fresh veggies and meat, and no soda except on special occasions and brushed my teeth three times a day. Genetics, good brushing habits, and fresh food are all important factors.
Ingesting fluoride is just not healthy.
MattBaggins
(7,897 posts)why
obamanut2012
(26,047 posts)I just think it's interesting that this has been my experience with relatives and people I know.
proud2BlibKansan
(96,793 posts)PurityOfEssence
(13,150 posts)No, Jack, I can't say that I have...
RIP Terry Southern...
originalpckelly
(24,382 posts)Perfect ID and response!
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Some places have naturally high levels of fluoride. So adding more fluoride into the water there is a health hazard. The federal government is lowering standards for fluoride water levels because of its findings:
http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/2011-01-07-too-much-fluoride_N.htm
http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110107a.html
Among the side effects of overexposure to fluoride are lower bone densities and higher fracture rates. This is the EPA page on the latest studies and risk assessments. It is likely that they will lower maximum levels at some point from the current level.
http://water.epa.gov/action/advisories/drinking/fluoride_index.cfm
Fluoride in water is considered a contaminant by EPA if it is present at levels over 4.0 mg/L. This occurs naturally, but you are supposed to lower fluoride levels in drinking water if it does.
Just for fun I looked up this place (Hartland Township, MI), and its test fluoride level was considered 1.8.
http://www.hartlandtwp.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=qvW-KLYVLYg%3d&tabid=746
The recommended standards for drinking water are lower than that, so it is not surprising at all that they would discontinue the practice. The new recommended is probably going to be the lower level of the previous recommended range 0.7 to 1.2, so they don't need to fluoridate their water. Hartland gets its water from deep wells, so they probably naturally have pretty high fluoride levels.
NRC leaned to cutting maximum levels to 2 in 2006:
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/materials-based-on-reports/reports-in-brief/fluoride_brief_final.pdf
Overseas
(12,121 posts)There is scientific dispute about the issue but some folks love to get their "Lookie me, tough skeptic" points by jumping in on some topics to ridicule and squash any discussion, especially when known kooks have been involved at some point.
Trashing the kooks is so much easier than re-examining cost benefit ratios and reviewing chemicals that have been strongly promoted as beneficial for decades.
SixthSense
(829 posts)1950s medical science are immutable and eternal laws of nature, dammit!
taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)Hawaii didn't floridate water when I was a child (don't know if they do now), and the incidence of dental caries was one of the worst in the nation.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)Must have been that lack of fluoridation.
Or me spitting out the nonfat dry powdered milk that Mom tried to make us drink.