LETTERS
This section has a handful of letters from various organizations and people on Fluoridation.
This page is just a few of the letters that we thought you might find interesting.
National Federation of Federal Employees
P.O. Box 76082, Washington, DC 20013
202-260-4683 (V) 202-401-3139 (F)
Local 2050
July 2, 1997
Mr. Jeff Green
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water 3243 Madrid Street San Diego, CA 92110
Dear Mr. Green:
I am pleased to report that our union, Local 2050, National Federation of Federal Employees, has voted to co-sponsor the California citizens' petition to prohibit fluoridation of which your organization is the sponsor. Our union represents, and is comprised of, the scientists, lawyers, engineers and other professionals at the headquarters of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency here in Washington, D.C..
A vote of the membership was taken at a meeting during which Professor Paul Connett and Dr. Robert Carton made presentations, respectively, on the recent toxicological and epidemiological evidence developed on fluoride and past actions (and their bases) of Local 2050 with respect to fluoride in drinking water. The membership vote was unanimous in favor of cosponsorship.
It is our hope that our cosponsorship will have a beneficial effect on the health and welfare of all Californians by helping to keep their drinking water free of a chemical substance for which there is substantial evidence of adverse health effects and, contrary to public perception, virtually no evidence of significant benefits.
These judgments are based, in part, on animal studies of the toxicity of fluoride coupled with the human epidemiology studies which corroborate them, and the studies of rates of decayed, missing and filled teeth in the United States (fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities) versus non-fluoridated European countries.
Our members review of the body of evidence over the last eleven years, including animal and human epidemiology studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology. Of particular concern are recent epidemiology studies linking fluoride exposures to lower I.Q. in children.
As professionals who are charged with assessing the safety off drinking water, we conclude that the health and welfare of the public is not served by the addition of this substance to the public water supply.
Best wishes to you and your organization for success in keeping what would otherwise be a hazardous waste of the fertilizer industry from being disposed of in California's drinking water supplies.
Sincerely,
J. William Hirzy, Ph.D.
Senior Vice-President
________
Ed. Note: As of April 1998, the National Federation of Employees Local 2050 changed its name to the National Treasury Employees Union. Chapter 280.
They have 1500 Members.
Dr. Hirzy invites your call at 202-26O-4683
This is a letter from the Citizens for Safe Drinking Water-Utah
April 4, 2000
To whom it may concern,
There is currently an active effort in Utah to fluoridate our public drinking water. Current law allows the issue to be placed on the ballot by city councils or--in first and second class counties--by county commissioners. This is the only issue allowed by law to be placed on the ballot without going through the initiative process first.
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water--Utah is concerned about fluoridation for a number of reasons, including:
The fact that there has never been a scientific study, using tap water, which proves the safety of fluoride.
The fact that there has been a steady stream of research studies which show that fluoride in drinking water is not safe for everyone, and that the federal Health and Human Services warns that subsets of the population are at substantial risk from fluoride.
The fact that it is not appropriate to use the public water supply as a delivery system for mass medication; chlorine treats water; fluoride treats people.
The fact that a product which cannot be diluted enough to be legally dumped into the Ocean is purported to be safe when diluted at 1 ppm and added to our drinking water.
The fact that fluoride is cumulative in the body and that it is impossible to regulate the dosage in a one-size-fits-all approach.
The fact that when total intake of fluoride from all sources is taken into consideration, including commercially processed foods and beverages, fluoridated water results in the overdosing of many people.
The fact that there are many good alternatives for those who want fluoride, such as rinses, gels, and fluoride tablets.
The fact that proponents of fluoride use decades-old documentation in addressing both the effectiveness and the safety of fluoride.
Feel free to contact us, for further information. This is not simply "a voting issue" or "letting the people decide." This is a matter of public safety for Utah citizens and highlights the responsibility of the promoters of fluoridation to inform the public of potentially harmful effects of fluoride to subsets of the population. This, they are not doing.
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water-Utah
P.O. Box 1973
Provo, Utah 84603
Phone (801) 492-0217 or (801) 221-5815
Fax (801) 492-0210 or (801) 221-5817
E-mail: [email protected]
This Letter is from The University of Utah.
Thursday, May 14, 1998
To whom it may concern:
It has been proposed to add fluoride to the water supply of the larger communities of Utah to prevent dental caries. This proposal will undoubtedly generate debate about the benefits and risk of low level ingestion of fluoride on human health.
I wanted to comment on some possible untoward side effects associated with the ingestion of low levels of fluoride. In 1991 three colleagues and myself published a paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association entitled "Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah's elderly population." (See JAMA 1992; 268:746-748) suggesting that there was a 27% (rate ratio=1.27) increase in hip fractures among women, and a 41% (rate ratio= 1.41) increase in hip fractures among men age 65+ living in Brigham City, the largest fluoridated community in Utah, compared to Logan and Cedar City. The study covered fractures occurring between 1984-1990.
We undertook the study because of reopens in the medical literature of increased hip fractures among women who had received high doses (75 mg/day) of fluoride for the treatment of osteoporosis. We were surprised to find an effect at the much lower dose from a fluoridated water system (between 1-2 mg/d).
Since our study was published three additional reports have appeared in the medical literature. Sower et al., (American Journal of Epidemiology 1991, 133:649-660) reported a more than 100% increased risk of hip fracture among women ages 55+ living in Iowa communities with 15+mg/1 of fluoride compared to communities with 1 mg/l of fluoride.
Jacobsen et al., (Annuals of Epidemiology 1992, 2:617=626) studied 129 U.S. counties with fluoridated water supplies and reported an 8% (rate ratio=1.08) for women and 17% (rate ratio=l. 17) increase in hip fractures among the fluoridated compared to 194 counties without fluoridation.
Jacquin-Gadda et al./(JAMA 1995, 273:775. letter to the editor) reported on hip fractures among 3578 people age 65+ living in southwestern France, and drinking fluoridated water. They were able to calculate an individual dose for each subject, and control for body mass, and cigarette smoking. They reported an 86°/4 increase in hip fractures (rate ratio--1.86) among those with the highest levels of fluoride intake (0.11-1.83 mg/L) and no effect for calcium in water, nor for other sites of fractures besides the hip.
One of the four scientific studies on the association of hip fracture with fluoride consumption in drinking water, all found an increased risk of hip fracture among those age 65+.
The study by Jaquin-Gadda et al., had the most precise information on the study subjects daily fluoride consumption, and was able to control for other potential confounding factors such as cigarette smoking, physical activities, etc.. The investigators found the strongest association between low level fluoride consumption and subsequent hip fracture.
All four studies mentioned above suggest that hip fracture may be an adverse health effect of fluoridation of public water systems. Certainly further work needs to be done on this association including a cost/benefit analysis before additional public water systems are fluoridated.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph L. Lyon, MD., M.P.H. Professor
Department of Family arid Preventive Medicine
50 North Medical Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84132
(801) 581-7234
Fax: (801) 581-2759
_______
Ed. Note: As of February 2000, Dr. Joseph Lyon says he continues to stand by his research.
This page is just a few of the letters that we thought you might find interesting.
National Federation of Federal Employees
P.O. Box 76082, Washington, DC 20013
202-260-4683 (V) 202-401-3139 (F)
Local 2050
July 2, 1997
Mr. Jeff Green
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water 3243 Madrid Street San Diego, CA 92110
Dear Mr. Green:
I am pleased to report that our union, Local 2050, National Federation of Federal Employees, has voted to co-sponsor the California citizens' petition to prohibit fluoridation of which your organization is the sponsor. Our union represents, and is comprised of, the scientists, lawyers, engineers and other professionals at the headquarters of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency here in Washington, D.C..
A vote of the membership was taken at a meeting during which Professor Paul Connett and Dr. Robert Carton made presentations, respectively, on the recent toxicological and epidemiological evidence developed on fluoride and past actions (and their bases) of Local 2050 with respect to fluoride in drinking water. The membership vote was unanimous in favor of cosponsorship.
It is our hope that our cosponsorship will have a beneficial effect on the health and welfare of all Californians by helping to keep their drinking water free of a chemical substance for which there is substantial evidence of adverse health effects and, contrary to public perception, virtually no evidence of significant benefits.
These judgments are based, in part, on animal studies of the toxicity of fluoride coupled with the human epidemiology studies which corroborate them, and the studies of rates of decayed, missing and filled teeth in the United States (fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities) versus non-fluoridated European countries.
Our members review of the body of evidence over the last eleven years, including animal and human epidemiology studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology. Of particular concern are recent epidemiology studies linking fluoride exposures to lower I.Q. in children.
As professionals who are charged with assessing the safety off drinking water, we conclude that the health and welfare of the public is not served by the addition of this substance to the public water supply.
Best wishes to you and your organization for success in keeping what would otherwise be a hazardous waste of the fertilizer industry from being disposed of in California's drinking water supplies.
Sincerely,
J. William Hirzy, Ph.D.
Senior Vice-President
________
Ed. Note: As of April 1998, the National Federation of Employees Local 2050 changed its name to the National Treasury Employees Union. Chapter 280.
They have 1500 Members.
Dr. Hirzy invites your call at 202-26O-4683
This is a letter from the Citizens for Safe Drinking Water-Utah
April 4, 2000
To whom it may concern,
There is currently an active effort in Utah to fluoridate our public drinking water. Current law allows the issue to be placed on the ballot by city councils or--in first and second class counties--by county commissioners. This is the only issue allowed by law to be placed on the ballot without going through the initiative process first.
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water--Utah is concerned about fluoridation for a number of reasons, including:
The fact that there has never been a scientific study, using tap water, which proves the safety of fluoride.
The fact that there has been a steady stream of research studies which show that fluoride in drinking water is not safe for everyone, and that the federal Health and Human Services warns that subsets of the population are at substantial risk from fluoride.
The fact that it is not appropriate to use the public water supply as a delivery system for mass medication; chlorine treats water; fluoride treats people.
The fact that a product which cannot be diluted enough to be legally dumped into the Ocean is purported to be safe when diluted at 1 ppm and added to our drinking water.
The fact that fluoride is cumulative in the body and that it is impossible to regulate the dosage in a one-size-fits-all approach.
The fact that when total intake of fluoride from all sources is taken into consideration, including commercially processed foods and beverages, fluoridated water results in the overdosing of many people.
The fact that there are many good alternatives for those who want fluoride, such as rinses, gels, and fluoride tablets.
The fact that proponents of fluoride use decades-old documentation in addressing both the effectiveness and the safety of fluoride.
Feel free to contact us, for further information. This is not simply "a voting issue" or "letting the people decide." This is a matter of public safety for Utah citizens and highlights the responsibility of the promoters of fluoridation to inform the public of potentially harmful effects of fluoride to subsets of the population. This, they are not doing.
Citizens for Safe Drinking Water-Utah
P.O. Box 1973
Provo, Utah 84603
Phone (801) 492-0217 or (801) 221-5815
Fax (801) 492-0210 or (801) 221-5817
E-mail: [email protected]
This Letter is from The University of Utah.
Thursday, May 14, 1998
To whom it may concern:
It has been proposed to add fluoride to the water supply of the larger communities of Utah to prevent dental caries. This proposal will undoubtedly generate debate about the benefits and risk of low level ingestion of fluoride on human health.
I wanted to comment on some possible untoward side effects associated with the ingestion of low levels of fluoride. In 1991 three colleagues and myself published a paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association entitled "Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah's elderly population." (See JAMA 1992; 268:746-748) suggesting that there was a 27% (rate ratio=1.27) increase in hip fractures among women, and a 41% (rate ratio= 1.41) increase in hip fractures among men age 65+ living in Brigham City, the largest fluoridated community in Utah, compared to Logan and Cedar City. The study covered fractures occurring between 1984-1990.
We undertook the study because of reopens in the medical literature of increased hip fractures among women who had received high doses (75 mg/day) of fluoride for the treatment of osteoporosis. We were surprised to find an effect at the much lower dose from a fluoridated water system (between 1-2 mg/d).
Since our study was published three additional reports have appeared in the medical literature. Sower et al., (American Journal of Epidemiology 1991, 133:649-660) reported a more than 100% increased risk of hip fracture among women ages 55+ living in Iowa communities with 15+mg/1 of fluoride compared to communities with 1 mg/l of fluoride.
Jacobsen et al., (Annuals of Epidemiology 1992, 2:617=626) studied 129 U.S. counties with fluoridated water supplies and reported an 8% (rate ratio=1.08) for women and 17% (rate ratio=l. 17) increase in hip fractures among the fluoridated compared to 194 counties without fluoridation.
Jacquin-Gadda et al./(JAMA 1995, 273:775. letter to the editor) reported on hip fractures among 3578 people age 65+ living in southwestern France, and drinking fluoridated water. They were able to calculate an individual dose for each subject, and control for body mass, and cigarette smoking. They reported an 86°/4 increase in hip fractures (rate ratio--1.86) among those with the highest levels of fluoride intake (0.11-1.83 mg/L) and no effect for calcium in water, nor for other sites of fractures besides the hip.
One of the four scientific studies on the association of hip fracture with fluoride consumption in drinking water, all found an increased risk of hip fracture among those age 65+.
The study by Jaquin-Gadda et al., had the most precise information on the study subjects daily fluoride consumption, and was able to control for other potential confounding factors such as cigarette smoking, physical activities, etc.. The investigators found the strongest association between low level fluoride consumption and subsequent hip fracture.
All four studies mentioned above suggest that hip fracture may be an adverse health effect of fluoridation of public water systems. Certainly further work needs to be done on this association including a cost/benefit analysis before additional public water systems are fluoridated.
Sincerely yours,
Joseph L. Lyon, MD., M.P.H. Professor
Department of Family arid Preventive Medicine
50 North Medical Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84132
(801) 581-7234
Fax: (801) 581-2759
_______
Ed. Note: As of February 2000, Dr. Joseph Lyon says he continues to stand by his research.
[Articles][Letters][Professionals][Silicofluorides & Lead][Unusually Susceptible][Rejection][Geography][Links]
"Natural Healing with Herbs for a Healthier You"
