Flouridation
Category: 'Correspondence'
2005-09-19
On September 19, 2005, the pros and cons of water fluoridation were
presented to Wilmont by Dr. Susan Mearns (a toxicologist representing
Santa Monica's Environmental Task Force) and Dr. Stephen Tarzynski (a pediatrician representing the ADA's position). After careful deliberation, Wilmont passed the following resolution:
"Wilmont wants to go on record that it is requesting that the City do a risk assessment study, in connection with the fluoridation chemicals to be used/stored/transported, as recommended by Santa Monica's Environmental Task Force, before it proceeds further with any fluoridation plans."
Over 7,000 scientists and public health professionals represented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's unions have requested that the maximum contaminant level for fluoride be changed to ZERO. They base this on evidence that fluoride is a likely cancer-causing substance (carcinogen). Among other concerns, the fluoridation chemicals contain trace amounts of arsenic and lead. They have asked Congress to declare a nationwide moratorium on fluoridation pending an immediate investigation and hearings. [See www.FluorideAction.org]
As a matter of record, the constitutionality of mandatory mass medication of people via public water supplies has never been decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
There are many published reports of numerous accidents at fluoridation facilities as well as accidents in the transportation and handling of these toxic industrial chemicals. These accidents have resulted in serious and sometimes fatal injuries. [See www.FluorideAction.org/health/accidents]
Nevertheless, the City Council approved the first of a series of contracts on October 11, 2005 to construct fluoridation facilities at Santa Monica well sites. Present estimates for this expense are about two to three million dollars.
Please see the following websites for more information: www.FluorideAction.org and www.SMSDW.org.
Home >> Articles >> Show >> 34