California To Mandate Statewide Water Fluoridation
August 28 2004 - A bill has been passed in the California State Legislature that will, if signed into law by governor Schwarzenegger, mandate all municipalities in the state to fluoridate their water supplies. Fluoridation, which outside of the US and a few other countries has been tried and abandoned, is supposed to make for healthier teeth but that claim is hotly contested by independent experts.
The substance used, hydrofluorosilicic acid, is a hazardous waste product, primarily of the fertilizer industry. A common visible effect of fluoride ingestion is the appearance of ungainly discolored spots on teeth, fluoridosis, which many of the dental associations classify as merely "cosmetic". A more important and less known effect of fluoride consumption is that it appears to make people docile.
I suppose Californians have always been more independent and self-determined than others in the US, but at least some discussion and public information before passing the bill might have been in order?
Thanks for this message go to Victoria Inness-Brown and Kathy Dery who forwarded it to the Alternative Medicine Forum.
Hello,
The California legislature has started mimicking recent unethical actions of the U.S. legislature. Remember when our Government passed the Patriot Act without allowing public discussion or even permitting senators and congressmen to read the act? Now the California legislature is doing the same thing. It has just pushed through a law without permitting the 30 day discussion period and without full disclosure of the risks.
The law is now awaiting the signature of Arnold Schwarzenegger. After that, all
municipalities in California will be required to fluoridate their water without the consent of the people. (When proposed to the people of San Diego twice in the past 60 years, each time the people voted against it.)You may think that fluoride in our drinking water is good for fighting tooth decay. The benefits of fluoride are themselves controversial. The fluoride they plan to put into our water supply, however, is from hydrofluorosilicic acid - a by-product of the fertilizer industry. It is known to contain arsenic and lead and is regarded as hazardous. See the Material Safety Data Sheet.
Their website states that the acid is "Corrosive. Contact may cause severe irritation, eye burns and permanent eye damage." It may also cause "severe skin irritation, burns and permanent skin damage" and is "harmful if inhaled."
Hydrofluorosilicic acid has never been tested for long-term safety. Notice that the MSDS lists "CARCINOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. MUTAGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. TERATOGENIC EFFECTS: Not available. DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Not available." So apparently no one has bothered to research the long term health effects of what's being put into the water for us to drink. If you search the EPA website, only one listing appears. It links to a PDF file that states that the acid is added to the water supply for the purpose of fluoridation - that's it.
What about arsenic in our drinking water? In January 2001 the EPA changed the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of arsenic in drinking water from 50 µg/L to 10 µg/L and the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) to zero. The "EPA has decided to set the drinking water standard for arsenic higher than the technically feasible level of 3 µg/L because EPA believes that the costs would not justify the benefits at this level." See http://www.epa.gov/. The EPA
feels we are safest with absolutely no arsenic in our water!The EPA website states that: "Studies link inorganic arsenic ingestion to a number of health effects. These health effects include:
* Cancerous Effects: skin, bladder, lung, kidney, nasal passages, liver and prostate cancer; and
* Non-cancerous effects: cardiovascular, pulmonary, immunological, neurological and endocrine (e.g., diabetes) effects."
What about lead? It is a known neurotoxin. The EPA website (http://www.epa.gov/lead/) states that: "Lead is a highly toxic metal that ... may cause a range of health effects, from behavioral problems and learning disabilities, to seizures and death. Children 6 years old and under are most at risk, because their bodies are growing quickly." These are precisely the children that the Government supposedly wants to give fluoride to prevent cavities! Which would you rather risk? Cavities or "behavioral problems, learning disabilities, seizures and death."
According to a recent email message from Jeff Green, Director of Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, "the California State Legislature used all of the tricks available to prevent public participation and assure information was not available to legislators in their decision making that will likely, and is intended to, effect what 35 million Californians will eat and drink for the rest of their lives, as well as who will pay for it, and who will defend the coercive action."
In my opinion, this bill was pushed through the legislature to provide the fertilizer industry a convenient way to dispose of their toxic waste and make a profit on it. This represents one more example of the rights of ordinary citizens being superceded by a powerful corporate-controlled government.
Please read and contact Governor Schwarzenegger to voice YOUR opinion.
Victoria Inness-Brown
See also related:Fluoridation for San Diego gains in Capitol
The Hidden and Dangerous Side Effects of Fluoride
Scientists Demand Integrity, Transparency in Fluoridation Debate
Maryland water district decides to end fluoridation
The South Blount Utility District in Maryland decided to stop fluoridating its water when it opened its new plant in June of 2004. District manager Isom Lail and plant manager Henry Durant recommended to the South Blount Utility District Board that they stop fluoridation, since the chemical is not a required additive. Lail notes that fluoridated water could be beneficial to children between the ages of 4 and 14, but that it has been linked to diseases like osteoporosis and cancer. Lail says most water district customers have not expressed any opinion on the subject. He notes that his wife's kidney condition has been somewhat less severe after the change in their drinking water.Honolulu Bans Water Fluoridation
WHO to review Fluoride Guidelines
Water Fluoridation: Folly or Fraud?
By David McRae, B.Sc. (Hons)
Every day of the week, most Americans, Australians, New Zealanders, and Irish are exposed to an influence that can be a cause of serious health problems: the addition of chemical fluoride to our drinking water.
(The article starts one-third down the page - you need to scroll down to find it.)Fluoridation Side Effects - Fluoride, Cancer
Does water fluoridation have negative side effects?
A critique of the York ReviewApologize for Fluoridation; Don't Celebrate It, Say Experts
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Tuesday August 31 2004
updated on Sunday December 5 2010URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/08/31/california_to_mandate_statewide_water_fluoridation.htm
