SC Board of Supervisors seek to put fluoride in our water 2/28

[Peace Voyager]

Here's a serious concern regarding agenda item #27:
Accept a status report on Dental Health in Sonoma County.

Sounds benign right? Look closer and you will see how they want to spend money on putting a toxin in our water supply - fluoride.

https://sonoma-county.granicus.com/M...&meta_id=79770

Remember, the American Dental Association is a lobbying biz for an industry; not your health. Most Doctors know how bad it is to ingest fluoride. Your bones, filtering organs and brain are impacted by it.

We have to let the Board of Directors for the Water Agency, (which in case you may not know, are our Supervisors) - Fluoride is a byproduct of aluminum; we know the risks – keep it out of our bodies, don't waste precious tax dollars to pollute us with it.

If you are too busy to keep up with water issues, consider being part of the Sonoma County Water Coalition. No time for that, just join their yahoogroup, and then phone, fax or e mail, or show up at the Board of Supervisors and City Council meetings, to speak up on important issues.

The SCWC had a tech review meeting on the fluoride issue; search their yahoogroup for info. [email protected]

OCCUPY THE COUNTY OF SONOMA!!!

Clip, save, use weekly please:

www.supervisors.sonoma-county.org/
(707) 565-2241
(707) 565-3778 Fax

1) [email protected]
Staff: [email protected]

2) [email protected]
[email protected]

3) [email protected]
[email protected]

4) [email protected]
[email protected]

5)[email protected]
[email protected]

[theindependenteye]

>>>Remember, the American Dental Association is a lobbying biz for an industry; not your health.

This is oonfusing to me. My understanding is that fluoride is said to prevent tooth decay, which would tend to lower dental bills. Are you saying that it increases the income of dentists? Please clarify.

-Conrad

[Peace Voyager]

The ADA supports the dental industry; which would include the suppliers of fluoride. Dentist are not internist; but not all Dentist are sheep. Some know the science of what this toxin can do; and they don't get behind the propaganda.

As for the so called science behind the benefits of fluoride, the tests were done in the 1940's; and the conclusions were manufactured. Remember the ads of Doctors saying how smoking was good for you? The same propaganda machine perpetuates this "toxins are good for you" myth.

Remember "Dr. Strangelove"? They joked about it being used for mind control, but that really happened during Hitler's control of Germany. Because one of the speakers brought that up at the BOS, they used that to discredit. Digging into the facts of our history is seems to be too hard for many people to do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcHNYenN7OY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eB5V...eature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUro...feature=fvwrel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP7I...eature=related

It was unbelievable how angry Supervisors Rabbitt and McGuire were towards us. We have a long way to go to educate them and everyone else who doesn't know the truth.

Here's a start. Even China has banned it! www.fluoridation.com/c-country.htm

Newsflash! Fox News tells the truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp3w...eature=related

This is the position statement from the Sonoma County Water Coalition
www.scwatercoalition.org

THE
SONOMA COUNTY WATER COALITION IS NOW 32
ORGANIZATIONS STRONG
REPRESENTING MORE THAN 24,000 CALIFORNIA VOTERS

SCWC Statement on
Fluoride - March 2010

Sonoma County Water Coalition (SCWC) supports
policies intended to deliver medical and dental care to all children,
disabled adults, and those in the disadvantaged groups of our
population.

SCWC believes policies intended to use public water
supply as the delivery vehicle for mass medication should be determined
by the informed consent of water users through the ballot measure
process.
Researchers and others differ in their conclusions
concerning the effectiveness of fluoride as a contributor to dental
health.

Over-consumption of fluoride at levels exceeding those
used in water fluoridation can cause health problems, occurs naturally
at various levels in water, and presently included as an additive in
many brands of toothpaste, soft drinks and other products.

Fluoride
may also pass through wastewater treatment plants and may become an
environmental contaminant.

SCWC therefore urges any public health
agency concerned with dental health of children to focus on nutritional
and health education for families, free toothbrushes and toothpaste in
schools, and other low cost outreach programs with water fluoridation
being decided by voters.

SCWC also urges any water agency considering
fluoridation of public water supply to submit such proposal to water
users as a ballot measure, and, in the event that such a ballot measure
is approved, to provide free or low-cost fluoride removal filters to
water users upon request. It is also recommended that fluoride should be
used at dosage levels at or below 1.2 mg/L and that the formulation as
added to potable water should meet the most stringent purity standards.

[Glia]

The "Executive Summary Final Report of The Sonoma County Task Force on Oral Health" document [oraltaskforcefinalreport.pdf] is available from the County Public Health department and was included in yesterday's daily digest bulletin email. Presumably this is the status report referenced in agenda item #27. Here's what the report says about water fluoridation recommendations:

Through research on promising practices and local assets, the Task Force developed a preliminary slate of strategies which could have significant positive impact; could be substantially implemented within a three-year timeframe; and could be implemented with current resources or those likely to be available within the near future. Some key strategies viewed by Task Force members as essential to building an effective oral health system, such as publicly funded dental insurance for low-income adults or fluoridation of the public water supply, were not considered for inclusion in the slate because they could not be accomplished within the targeted timeframe or with local efforts alone.

So it appears that this Oral Health Task Force thinks that fluoridating the public water supply is a "key strategy" toward building an effective oral health system (ie they like the idea), but they are not recommending it at this time due to time constraints.

Just in case, it would not hurt to phone/email your supervisor and let them know that you are against having SCWA add fluoride to the water they supply.

Here's a serious concern regarding agenda item #27:
Accept a status report on Dental Health in Sonoma County.

Sounds benign right? Look closer and you will see how they want to spend money on putting a toxin in our water supply - fluoride.

https://sonoma-county.granicus.com/M...&meta_id=79770

[Peace Voyager]

That did not come up at the meeting. Right now they have the wrong meeting video on the link for yesterday's meeting.

https://supervisors.sonoma-county.org/meeting_archive.aspx?sid=1001&id=1002

I just called them, someone else let them know before, so they are working on fixing it. She said it would be up by tomorrow.

The Board did ask the task force to spend the next year looking at the feasibility of putting fluoride in our water. So please, contact all the Supervisors and urge them to stop wasting time an money on this toxic substance; and focus on affordable access to Dentists, and education for safe methods of dental care. Only a flood of voters contacting them will make a dent in their closed minds.

In 1996, the CA legislature made a law mandating cities of 10,000 or more to put fluoride in their water if they had the funds for it. Do you think any city in this state has extra money? So why has this beast risen. The ADA lobbyist have been very active in DC; for the wrong reasons.

The only good thing that happened during Rabbitt's and McGuire's chastising, was that Rabbitt agreed with my statement of finding cost effective ways of dealing with the problems of dental care here (54% of us do not have access to dental care). What I had said was, to take the cost of fluoridation, and put it into more low or no cost dental clinics.

But of course the Press Democrat's reporter Brett Wilkinson did not include that in his article today. https://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...ff-the-charts- Keep the letters to the Editor coming as well; they printed a bunch from both sides.

I think that it's only because I have shown Rabbitt respect; that even in his anger, he aligned with the sensibility of my public comment. McGuire agreed he and I need another meeting to work through this.

Zane, on the other hand, has let her new power of Chair go to her head in ways many folks are noticing. Every week she abuses her position to another degree. This issue, and a few more, have caused me to work to recruit a challenger for her. I found 3 sets of special interests ready to do that in just one day! That was in addition to sitting through nearly the entire BOS and SR CC meetings; 10 hours total.

Some of us went later to the Santa Rosa City Council meeting where they were addressing the issue of raising the water/sewer rates - again. You see, like most cities, SR has been addicted to growth. They make the current ratepayers pay the cost of expansion for future ratepayers, but when the economy tanked, the growth they banked on did not happen. Also, the public got much better at conservation; then got rewarded with several rate increases, because of the loss of incoming funds to manage the system. Does that make sense?

At that meeting I spoke with the GM of the North Marin Water District, one of the SC Water Agency contractors. I mentioned to him my overdue interest in having the Marin Breast Cancer Study look into fluoride as a factor in their study.

In case you were not aware, they have a higher incident of breast cancer there. I thrive on looking for reasons to explain things like this, and wish I had time for another career in research, coming up with lifestyle choices for the questionnaires such as: how many mammograms they have over the average, are under-wire bras a factor, etc. Southern Marin uses fluoride, Northern does not. So analyzing the cancer rate increase by address could inform us if fluoride poses this kind of risk.

With the slide of the Public Utilities funding deficit still overhead, I asked him how in the world anyone could justify paying to put an additional toxin in the water. He said that the mandate requires the funding come from some other source than ratepayers. So I asked where would that money come from; as the rest of Santa Rosa's budget, as is all the other contractors', is lacking to the point of basic services being cut to the bone. He said it came from the Dentists, and then quickly left, before I finished my sentence about looking at the link for breast cancer.

Dentist paying to put something in our water? I think what he meant was their Lobbying arm, the American Dental Association, is busy in Washington, (I got a note from Bernie Sanders, dental care was at the top of the list); so I'm guessing they're looking for Federal grant money for this.

This is exactly why I am running for Senate. They have too many misplaced, and dangerous priorities. The 1% have been sponsoring the election of the 1% to run the Senate for far too long. I'm here to occupy the People's seat for the 99%

Please help me make a stand, so these issues can get some attention. If 99% of this state's progressive folks from all parties, and no party helped me, even in small ways; we could make some big noise about what matters most. Winning the seat is not the main goal; getting attention on the essential issues is.

Are you in? Let's go!

Much thanks,

Colleen Fernald

www.campaignforpeace.org

The "Executive Summary Final Report of The Sonoma County Task Force on Oral Health" document [oraltaskforcefinalreport.pdf] is available from the County Public Health department and was included in yesterday's daily digest bulletin email. Presumably this is the status report referenced in agenda item #27. Here's what the report says about water fluoridation recommendations:

Through research on promising practices and local assets, the Task Force developed a preliminary slate of strategies which could have significant positive impact; could be substantially implemented within a three-year timeframe; and could be implemented with current resources or those likely to be available within the near future. Some key strategies viewed by Task Force members as essential to building an effective oral health system, such as publicly funded dental insurance for low-income adults or fluoridation of the public water supply, were not considered for inclusion in the slate because they could not be accomplished within the targeted timeframe or with local efforts alone.

So it appears that this Oral Health Task Force thinks that fluoridating the public water supply is a "key strategy" toward building an effective oral health system (ie they like the idea), but they are not recommending it at this time due to time constraints.

Just in case, it would not hurt to phone/email your supervisor and let them know that you are against having SCWA add fluoride to the water they supply.

[Kunnskaping]

My understanding is that fluoride is said to prevent tooth decay, which would tend to lower dental bills.

Topical applications of fluoride are used to harden the enamel of teeth. Ingesting the stuff, especially on a daily basis, is a different story.

If your dentist has applied fluoride, you may recall being told to be sure not to swallow any of the product and to carefully rinse it all out of your mouth when the trays are removed. Used properly, it can be beneficial. Dumped into your water, with no controls on how much will accumulate in one's body over time, it is a health risk on many levels. Why risk that when there are safe and effective ways of using fluoride to strengthen teeth?

[jbox]

Golly!!! First there was dastardly chemtrails and that didn't do it. Then there was dreaded smartmeters and that didn't do it. Now there's insidious fluoride, maybe that will do it. When will the populace finally realize they are trying to rob us of our precious bodily fluids? Robert Stack RIP....

[stuartdole]

I know that we gave our kid fluoride supplements from the time he was a baby (in utero actually) through his adult teeth, and he had NO cavities - just strong clean teeth. Coming from the boomer generation, we didn't get fluoride until Crest added it into their toothpaste, well after our adult teeth were in. Our teeth are a mess.

Who was it who said "the poison is in the dose"? Anything is a poison if you get too much. A friend of ours also gave their kid fluoride supplements, but they miscalculated the dose (he is a physician) and their kid's teeth were mottled.

I've heard that regular tea has some fluoride in it - maybe part of the reason tea drinkers have healthier teeth and mouths?

Just a comment on the idea of investing the cost of fluoridation towards community dental care - I think the PD article mentioned that it costs something like 50 cents a year per person to fluoridate the water - that won't go far towards an exam or cleaning. Otherwise it's a great idea...

[Peace Voyager]

Thank you for that Gila.

I suggest everyone THANK them ALL; for having the best interest of everyone in mind, (literally, and physically); by choosing to keep this toxin OUT of the Public's precious, and already overburdened, water supply.

This list of decision makers would include: the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, and every water Contractor City Council Member, and City Managers, & Attorneys, and the Dental health task force.

Also, if you are a concerned citizen group; consider joining the Sonoma County Water Coalition.
www.scwatercoalition.org.

yahoogroup: [email protected]

There is strength in numbers.

Right 99%ers?

The 1% are paying, and profiting from their Lobbyist hard work right now. The local governments are so tight for money; they're like beggars at the trough; so they play along. Hence the strong tone from the SC BOS.

Too many free thinkers here in this watershed. The 1% gains; profiting from dumbing us down; while they avoid the fee for toxic waste dumping.

One speaker at the BOS meeting on this, mentioned the science on the harmful impacts to animals. Cows and Horses are a big part of Sonoma County's revenue.

Caution should remain to prevail, on the cost, and choice of more contaminates added to everyone's water. Especially at a time when they can barely keep up the infrastructure, and saving the fish, without raising their rates every 6 months.

This was consequence of all the great water conservation we've been doing; and the growth they were projecting, not coming through. In part because; the folks doing those projections want to keep their jobs; so they are made to say what people want to hear; rather than what the truth is.

Also the other industries here, which greatly impact the endangered species; may not be paying their fair share for the impacts.

Pointing out these truths; is an essential difference, between me and the incumbent for US Senate.

The very good news today is; Tim Smith from RP has stepped in to the Supervisors' race to challenge Zane. This will help the 3rd district's needs, in being better met.

Make sure you let him know how you feel on the issues. And let the debates begin!

à votre santé

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dict...e%20sant%C3%A9
à vo·tre san·té

\ä-vȯt-säⁿ-tā, -vȯ-trə-\

Definition of À VOTRE SANTÉ

: to your health —used as a toast

Origin of À VOTRE SANTÉ

French

Here's to everyone's healthy water supply!,

Colleen Fernald,

California's Constitutional Candidate for PEACE & GREEN USA!
UNITED States Senate 2012
www.campaignforpeace.org

~~~~~
PLEASE tell the members of the Water Advisory Committee, & Sonoma County Dental Health Task Force, what you think; before they take a look at this at their next meeting 3/5/12.

Much thanks!

~~~~~~~~
Grant Davis, General Manger of the Sonoma County Water Agency
[email protected]
Water Advisory Committee (WAC)

The Water Advisory Committee (WAC) represents the major cities and water districts that receive water delivered by the Sonoma County Water Agency (Water Agency) aqueduct system. They include:

• City of Cotati
• City of Petaluma
• City of Rohnert Park
• City of Santa Rosa
• City of Sonoma
• Town of Windsor
• Marin Municipal Water District
• North Marin Water District
• Valley of the Moon Water District

The "Executive Summary Final Report of The Sonoma County Task Force on Oral Health" document [oraltaskforcefinalreport.pdf] is available from the County Public Health department and was included in yesterday's daily digest bulletin email. Presumably this is the status report referenced in agenda item #27. Here's what the report says about water fluoridation recommendations:

Through research on promising practices and local assets, the Task Force developed a preliminary slate of strategies which could have significant positive impact; could be substantially implemented within a three-year timeframe; and could be implemented with current resources or those likely to be available within the near future. Some key strategies viewed by Task Force members as essential to building an effective oral health system, such as publicly funded dental insurance for low-income adults or fluoridation of the public water supply, were not considered for inclusion in the slate because they could not be accomplished within the targeted timeframe or with local efforts alone.

So it appears that this Oral Health Task Force thinks that fluoridating the public water supply is a "key strategy" toward building an effective oral health system (ie they like the idea), but they are not recommending it at this time due to time constraints.

Just in case, it would not hurt to phone/email your supervisor and let them know that you are against having SCWA add fluoride to the water they supply.

[Glia]

This is a classic case of missing the point.

When spiking the water supply, there is no control over who is getting the substance, how much each individual is getting (the dose), and what happens to it after it leaves the water piping and is released into the environment.

If topical fluoride treatments on individuals work, then use them -- on individuals. The bigger issue is getting children in to a dentist and a hygienist on a regular basis for appropriate preventive care tailored to that individual child's age and other needs. It also sounds very much like the dosage and use of fluoride should be left to qualified professionals, yes?

From what Dynamic Balance has been telling us, equal attention should be given to ensuring that children receive good nutrition and effective levels of vitamins A, D, K2 and E as well as micronutrients. In short, we need to focus our money and attention on getting our children what they need to get a good start in life, not poisoning an entire population against their will.

One of the quality of life elements of living in Sonoma County is that the water is NOT fluoridated. I like not having to worry about being exposed to a metallic salt in the water that I may encounter at a restaurant, water fountain, self-serve soda bar, or coffee shop. I'm not at all interested in being inconvenienced by having to schlep around bottled or purified water to protect myself from a spiked public water supply.

By way of analogy, radiation can be used as therapy too. However, I doubt that any of us would be comfortable with the idea of "prophylactic" use of radioactive materials being embedded in the public roadways or other forced exposure to radiation for "preventative therapy" purposes.

I know that we gave our kid fluoride supplements from the time he was a baby (in utero actually) through his adult teeth, and he had NO cavities - just strong clean teeth. Coming from the boomer generation, we didn't get fluoride until Crest added it into their toothpaste, well after our adult teeth were in. Our teeth are a mess.

Who was it who said "the poison is in the dose"? Anything is a poison if you get too much. A friend of ours also gave their kid fluoride supplements, but they miscalculated the dose (he is a physician) and their kid's teeth were mottled.

I've heard that regular tea has some fluoride in it - maybe part of the reason tea drinkers have healthier teeth and mouths?

Just a comment on the idea of investing the cost of fluoridation towards community dental care - I think the PD article mentioned that it costs something like 50 cents a year per person to fluoridate the water - that won't go far towards an exam or cleaning. Otherwise it's a great idea...

[Peace Voyager]

Quite correct on all points.

This is a classic case of missing the point.

When spiking the water supply, there is no control over who is getting the substance, how much each individual is getting (the dose), and what happens to it after it leaves the water piping and is released into the environment.

If topical fluoride treatments on individuals work, then use them -- on individuals. The bigger issue is getting children in to a dentist and a hygienist on a regular basis for appropriate preventive care tailored to that individual child's age and other needs. It also sounds very much like the dosage and use of fluoride should be left to qualified professionals, yes?

From what Dynamic Balance has been telling us, equal attention should be given to ensuring that children receive good nutrition and effective levels of vitamins A, D, K2 and E as well as micronutrients. In short, we need to focus our money and attention on getting our children what they need to get a good start in life, not poisoning an entire population against their will.

One of the quality of life elements of living in Sonoma County is that the water is NOT fluoridated. I like not having to worry about being exposed to a metallic salt in the water that I may encounter at a restaurant, water fountain, self-serve soda bar, or coffee shop. I'm not at all interested in being inconvenienced by having to schlep around bottled or purified water to protect myself from a spiked public water supply.

By way of analogy, radiation can be used as therapy too. However, I doubt that any of us would be comfortable with the idea of "prophylactic" use of radioactive materials being embedded in the public roadways or other forced exposure to radiation for "preventative therapy" purposes.

[rossmen]

i read a few years ago of a large study which correlated extended time spent under bright artificial light with increased risk of breast cancer. the theory was based on melatonin cycles and its possible cancer protective abilities. the marin county cancer rates were part of this study due to the high number of highly educated affluent professional women, who have access to and use artificial light more than other american women.

That did not come up at the meeting. Right now they have the wrong meeting video on the link for yesterday's meeting.

https://supervisors.sonoma-county.org/meeting_archive.aspx?sid=1001&id=1002

I just called them, someone else let them know before, so they are working on fixing it. She said it would be up by tomorrow.

The Board did ask the task force to spend the next year looking at the feasibility of putting fluoride in our water. So please, contact all the Supervisors and urge them to stop wasting time an money on this toxic substance; and focus on affordable access to Dentists, and education for safe methods of dental care. Only a flood of voters contacting them will make a dent in their closed minds.

In 1996, the CA legislature made a law mandating cities of 10,000 or more to put fluoride in their water if they had the funds for it. Do you think any city in this state has extra money? So why has this beast risen. The ADA lobbyist have been very active in DC; for the wrong reasons.

The only good thing that happened during Rabbitt's and McGuire's chastising, was that Rabbitt agreed with my statement of finding cost effective ways of dealing with the problems of dental care here (54% of us do not have access to dental care). What I had said was, to take the cost of fluoridation, and put it into more low or no cost dental clinics.

But of course the Press Democrat's reporter Brett Wilkinson did not include that in his article today. https://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...ff-the-charts- Keep the letters to the Editor coming as well; they printed a bunch from both sides.

I think that it's only because I have shown Rabbitt respect; that even in his anger, he aligned with the sensibility of my public comment. McGuire agreed he and I need another meeting to work through this.

Zane, on the other hand, has let her new power of Chair go to her head in ways many folks are noticing. Every week she abuses her position to another degree. This issue, and a few more, have caused me to work to recruit a challenger for her. I found 3 sets of special interests ready to do that in just one day! That was in addition to sitting through nearly the entire BOS and SR CC meetings; 10 hours total.

Some of us went later to the Santa Rosa City Council meeting where they were addressing the issue of raising the water/sewer rates - again. You see, like most cities, SR has been addicted to growth. They make the current ratepayers pay the cost of expansion for future ratepayers, but when the economy tanked, the growth they banked on did not happen. Also, the public got much better at conservation; then got rewarded with several rate increases, because of the loss of incoming funds to manage the system. Does that make sense?

At that meeting I spoke with the GM of the North Marin Water District, one of the SC Water Agency contractors. I mentioned to him my overdue interest in having the Marin Breast Cancer Study look into fluoride as a factor in their study.

In case you were not aware, they have a higher incident of breast cancer there. I thrive on looking for reasons to explain things like this, and wish I had time for another career in research, coming up with lifestyle choices for the questionnaires such as: how many mammograms they have over the average, are under-wire bras a factor, etc. Southern Marin uses fluoride, Northern does not. So analyzing the cancer rate increase by address could inform us if fluoride poses this kind of risk.

With the slide of the Public Utilities funding deficit still overhead, I asked him how in the world anyone could justify paying to put an additional toxin in the water. He said that the mandate requires the funding come from some other source than ratepayers. So I asked where would that money come from; as the rest of Santa Rosa's budget, as is all the other contractors', is lacking to the point of basic services being cut to the bone. He said it came from the Dentists, and then quickly left, before I finished my sentence about looking at the link for breast cancer.

Dentist paying to put something in our water? I think what he meant was their Lobbying arm, the American Dental Association, is busy in Washington, (I got a note from Bernie Sanders, dental care was at the top of the list); so I'm guessing they're looking for Federal grant money for this.

This is exactly why I am running for Senate. They have too many misplaced, and dangerous priorities. The 1% have been sponsoring the election of the 1% to run the Senate for far too long. I'm here to occupy the People's seat for the 99%

Please help me make a stand, so these issues can get some attention. If 99% of this state's progressive folks from all parties, and no party helped me, even in small ways; we could make some big noise about what matters most. Winning the seat is not the main goal; getting attention on the essential issues is.

Are you in? Let's go!

Much thanks,

Colleen Fernald

www.campaignforpeace.org

[Glia]

If memory serves me correctly, the highly educated and affluent professional women of Marin county also had access to and used liquor more than other American women, too.

... the marin county cancer rates were part of this study due to the high number of highly educated affluent professional women, who have access to and use artificial light more than other american women.

[Peace Voyager]

Addressing these kind of lifestyle factors, is exactly why I want to see more non-biased research. The anwers we find, may solve many problems, and lessen much suffering.

If memory serves me correctly, the highly educated and affluent professional women of Marin county also had access to and used liquor more than other American women, too.

[Suzanne]

Floride is a toxic substance and IF they put it in our water supply the only filtering system to get it out is Distilling or Reverse Osmosis, both of which are very expensive filtering systems. Britta and Pur water filters are PROUD to point out that they do not remove floride.

I have always been so pleased that our water supply is floride free. I hope it stays that way.

Here's a serious concern regarding agenda item #27:
Accept a status report on Dental Health in Sonoma County.

Sounds benign right? Look closer and you will see how they want to spend money on putting a toxin in our water supply - fluoride.

https://sonoma-county.granicus.com/M...&meta_id=79770

Remember, the American Dental Association is a lobbying biz for an industry; not your health. Most Doctors know how bad it is to ingest fluoride. Your bones, filtering organs and brain are impacted by it.

We have to let the Board of Directors for the Water Agency, (which in case you may not know, are our Supervisors) - Fluoride is a byproduct of aluminum; we know the risks – keep it out of our bodies, don't waste precious tax dollars to pollute us with it.

If you are too busy to keep up with water issues, consider being part of the Sonoma County Water Coalition. No time for that, just join their yahoogroup, and then phone, fax or e mail, or show up at the Board of Supervisors and City Council meetings, to speak up on important issues.

The SCWC had a tech review meeting on the fluoride issue; search their yahoogroup for info. [email protected]

OCCUPY THE COUNTY OF SONOMA!!!

Clip, save, use weekly please:

www.supervisors.sonoma-county.org/
(707) 565-2241
(707) 565-3778 Fax

1) [email protected]
Staff: [email protected]

2) [email protected]
[email protected]

3) [email protected]
[email protected]

4) [email protected]
[email protected]

5)[email protected]
[email protected]