The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, www.supervisors.sonoma-county.org/
will be considering adding fluoride to the drinking water of the customers and contractors of the SC Water Agency.
They will be taking advisement from the Sonoma County Director of Health Services
[email protected]
The health of many people and watersheds will be detrimentally impacted, unless the majority of you take steps to prevent this known toxin from entering our drinking water, and the waste water being discharged.
We ,
Colleen Fernald
Sebastopol's City Council
Candidate for Water Security
www.campaignforpeace.org
Fluoride fight has long roots, passionate advocates
- By Dion Lefler
- The Wichita Eagle
Pro and con fluoridation yard signs sprout up around Wichita Oct. 22, 2012.
- Published Saturday, Oct. 27, 2012, at 1:31 p.m.
- Updated Saturday, Oct. 27, 2012, at 9:48 p.m.
Set aside the science lessons. The fight over fluoride is as much or more a clash of philosophy.
- Surrounding municipal water customers await Wichita’s fluoride vote
- Got questions about voting? We’ve got answers
- Speakers face off as KPTS hosts forum on fluoridation
- Health aspects of fluoridated water debated at Sedgwick County meeting
- County Commission to allow public comments on fluoridation next week
- Fluoridation foes object to county information sheet on issue
- Supporters, opponents plan two debates on fluoridating Wichita’s water
- Anti-fluoridation group seeks debate opponent
- Harvard scientists: Data on fluoride, IQ not applicable in U.S.
- Fluoride ballot item is more clear than others
- People make cases for, against fluoridated water
- Anti-fluoride group in Wichita issues a debate challenge
- Wichita City Council adds fluoride issue to Nov. 6 ballot
- Questions and answers before Wichita’s fluoridation vote
- Both sides present ‘information we believe in’ in fluoridation debate
- Private donors commit $1.35 million toward fluoride start-up costs in Wichita
As Wichitans decide whether to add the cavity-fighting chemical to their city’s drinking water, the two sides in the campaign for the Nov. 6 election are pounding away at each other with rhetorical clubs labeled “public good” and “freedom of choice.”
On one side are almost all the city’s doctors and dentists, dismayed by what they see as needless suffering in the patients who come to them with preventable dental decay. They gathered more than 11,000 signatures on an initiative petition that forced the City Council, which had avoided taking a stand on fluoride, to put it to a public vote.
They’ve been met with an equally passionate campaign by fluoride foes who see it as a dangerous forced medication. They see fluoridation as a case of government overstepping its bounds and taking over what they believe should be a matter of personal choice.
Both sides accuse the other of trying to deceive the public to win the election.
The anti-fluoride troops say the dentists and doctors are either ignoring or hiding the real risks of fluoridation to facilitate sales of fluoride, a by-product of the industrial process for making phosphate fertilizer.
The pro-fluoride side says 60 years of track record, 3,000 studies and the experience of three-fourths of Americans has proven fluoridation is an effective and safe way to strengthen everybody’s teeth. And they say the anti-fluoride group is either misunderstanding or willfully distorting science.
The pediatrician
Wichita pediatrician Larry Hund said he grew up in Wichita and loves his city, but it sure can be frustrating to try to get something done.
“I’m kind of actually disappointed that there’s that many people who don’t have that community spirit I see and hear in other communities,” Hund said. “I have two daughters in Omaha and when I’m up there I see so many more progressive things happening and it’s people doing things for the community, for the good of the community.”
Part of the problem as he sees it is lack of vision and leadership.
- Continues here: https://www.kansas.com/2012/10/27/25...#storylink=cpy