I've just spent some time reading the script of an on-line question period that took place in December 2012. Dr. Cynthia Morrow was being questioned about the validity and efficacy of public water fluoridation. It is clear that she had no practical understanding of how fluoride supposedly works, or at least was unwilling to share it. She claimed that all of the anti-fluoride studies are “non-generalizable”, and that the studies she was citing were peer-reviewed science. She provided the following links to pro-fluoride “studies” that, she said, defend fluoridation effectively.

 http://www.thecommunityguide.org/oral/fluoridation.html 

http://www.ada.org/sections/newsAndEvents/pdfs/fluoridation_facts.pdf

If you felt like you were chasing your tail reading this literature, its okay; so did I. Fortunately, I did find this buried treasure. Apparently the pro-fluoride movement shares this story with pride.

During the 1930s, Dr. H. Trendley Dean, a dental officer of the U.S. Public Health Service, and his associates conducted classic epidemiological studies on the

geographic distribution and severity of fluorosis in the United States. These early studies were aimed at evaluating how high the fluoride levels in water could be before visible, severe dental fluorosis occurred. By 1936, Dean and his staff had made the critical discovery that fluoride levels of up to 1.0 part per million (ppm) in the drinking water did not cause the more severe forms of dental fluorosis.  Dean additionally noted a correlation between fluoride levels in the water and reduced incidence of dental decay.

So, are we supposed to be set at ease by this kind of science? They carefully calculated exactly how much fluoride it would take to cause severe dental fluorosis, and then set the safe limit slightly below that amount. Aren't they concerned if people suffer from mild dental fluorosis (which I do), or other internal bodily harm?

What is even more alarming is that Dr. Ada Bennett, Medical Officer of Health, Alberta South Zone, recently suggested, in a local radio interview, that Lethbridge citizens would not be at risk until we had 10-15 times more fluoride in the water. That would be 10 to 15 ppm. According to Dr. Dean, at 10-15 ppm everybody in Lethbridge would be suffering from very severe dental fluorosis.

Why are we expected to believe Dr. Bennett? She might wear a white coat, but these are not white lies.

While I was reading Doug Kaupp’s 2011 Fluoride Report to Lethbridge City Council, the last paragraph really stuck out to me. He was discussing steps that he would suggest if the fluoride use were to be discontinued. He writes:

“In order to receive favourable pricing, the utility purchases the fluoride chemical [hydrofluorosilicic acid] in bulk, delivered by tanker truck. Therefore, we have storage facilities large enough that these shipments can be received with minimum storage levels to manage the risk of running out [what a tragedy that would be]. The amount of HFS acid storage on site can range from 3-20 tonnes. This represents between one and five months supply. The operational preference would be to avoid the cost of chemical disposal by continuing fluoridation of the water long enough to consume the chemical inventory.”

Does this upset any of you? If as citizens we decide that fluoride is in fact poisonous, our General Manager of Water And Wastewater would prefer to continue diluting the toxic waste into our water, rather than pay the chemical disposal cost. I called SENA Waste Services in Swan Hills to determine the cost of such a disposal. The cost for disposing of “municipal water grade” fluoride started at 1 dollar per kilogram, depending on, get this, the levels of other toxic contaminants.

So, according to Kaupp’s report, the Lethbridge fluoride storage facility has a 20 tonne capacity, which represents about a five month supply. From this, I estimate our yearly fluoride usage at 48,000 kilograms. That means, that every year, we are fluoridating our water with toxic waste that would otherwise cost nearly $50,000 to dispose of. It is easy to see why the fertilizer manufacturers are thrilled to sell us this stuff, instead of footing the disposal bill themselves.

Come on everyone, let’s give our heads a shake. This is total nonsense, and it’s high time for it to stop.