There are many reasons people are opposing the proposal for mass fluoridating Sonoma County's water supply, and there is much conflicting information, and so it's a worthy exercise to unpack each issue separately and investigate deeper into the general claims that are made in order to get the most accurate information possible. I would like to again note Patricia Dine's excellent summary of the concerning issues on the link she created and posted previously: https://www.healthyworld.org/SCFluoridation-About.html
So a valid question has been raised (among many): If Sonoma County fluoridates its water, will it affect Fluoride levels in the water systems of nearby cities that do not fluoridate, and also private wells? (There is also the issue of the environment in general and I've posted the Sierra Club's policy statement about fluoridation below.)
As a non-expert I'm curious to find out more about this issue.
Taking Sebastopol as the example, according to the most recent City of Sebastopol Consumer Confidence report that I could find online, in June 2011 (the sample date) the Fluoride level in Sebastopol city water was .17 PPM. BTW, according to the same report, the MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) which is described as "the highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water", is 2.0 PPM. The MCLG (Maximum Contaminant Level Goal) is 1.0 PPM and is describes as, "the level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)." (Note -- I am not endorsing this information, just noting that it's on the City of Sebastopol's Consumer Confidence report. And my understanding is that the proposed Fluoride level for county water would be .7 PPM, but I could be wrong about that.)
Also noted on the report is that the "typical source of contaminant" for Fluoride in water is "erosion of natural deposits, water additive that promotes strong teeth; discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories."
So one question on the table (again taking Sebastopol as an example): at the depths and sources from which the water is currently taken, would fluoridating Sonoma County's water system potentially (within a reasonable chance) increase the Fluoride level of the City of Sebastopol's water from its current level of .17 PPM to something greater? And by how much?
I'm hoping some local experts might weigh in about this.
Sierra Club statement below.
ScottSierra Club Conservation Policies
Policy on Fluoride in Drinking Water
The Sierra Club understands the historic reason that fluoridation of public water supplies has been promoted and that it may have been historically justifiable (162 million people get fluoride added to their municipal water supply at the recommended level of 0.7-1.2 mg/L). There are now, however, valid concerns regarding the potential adverse impact of fluoridation on the environment, wildlife, and human health.
Therefore, the Sierra Club believes that communities should have the option to reject mandatory fluoridation of their water supplies.
To protect sensitive populations, and because safer strategies and methods for preventing tooth decay are now available, we recommend that these safer alternatives be made available and promoted. If fluoride is added to municipal water supplies, sodium fluoride rather than flourosilicate compounds should be used because the latter has a greater risk of being contaminated with such heavy metals as lead and arsenic.
Before a water supply is fluoridated, there should be a local assessment of the impact on affected aquatic ecosystems. This assessment should examine background fluoride levels and estimate what the levels will be after fluoridation. It should also assess the effect of this increased fluoride on downstream aquatic ecosystems.
Board of Directors, June 19, 2008