That was the message I got from the public discussion during the City Council Tuesday night. The city chamber was full of members of the local dental association pitching for their cause to keep fluoride being added to the city's water supply. At one point during the debate from both sides, I heard one of the local dentist actually say, that the general public does not have the educational back ground on dentistry to make an informed decision on the issue of fluoride! I forgot the doctor's name who said it, but it was clear how the dental association views their patients as being not knowledgeable enough to make a rational decision on fluoride. Meaning folks we are too stupid for our own good! Funny, these dentist don't have a problem taking our money on those trips to the dentist do they? So, the whole thing came down to actually asking the public in a public vote what are there thoughts on the subject. Well I be! That's what I been advocating for nearly every time I ran for city council, and low and behold they saw the light apparently, and decided to have an non binding vote by the public whether or not to continue with the fluoride program. I of course question the motives of some council members voting in favor of putting this to a public vote, notably or pal "15 month Lee" Lee Whetham, who is currently running for Port Commission after only 15 months on the job at the city. I suspect this has much to do in seeking those anti-fluoride votes, and now since the city had decided to end the quest of installing those smart meters officially, he is now sounding like he is against the smart meters. I do recall Whetham saying during the election to city council in 2013, that he favored the council in honoring the contract with Mueller Systems, LLC . Now, apparently since the smart meter program is not longer viable for the council, he voted for the approval of the ordinance washing the city's hands of the whole matter, go figure! So here are the stories surrounding the debate about the fluoride issue, including an emailed article by one of the city council candidates, MAROLEE SMITH. In her article she shared with me, Smith wrote:
I went to the city council meeting last night (7/21/15). It was packed. Probably as packed as I saw it when the fluoride was jammed through 9 years ago.
Many people spoke. I found it interesting that the citizens were, by large, against keeping the fluoride in the water, but the dentists all said about the same thing.
The quoted the “talking points” from the ADA (American Dental Association) — word for word:
“More than 70 years of scientific research has consistently shown that an optimal level of fluoride in community water is safe and effective in preventing tooth decay by at least 25% in both children and adults. Simply by drinking water, Americans can benefit from fluoride’s cavity protection whether they are at home, work or school. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention named community water fluoridation one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.”
Source: http://www.ada.org/en/public-programs/advocating-for-the-public/fluoride-and-fluoridation
I can only assume that the dental schools, continuing education classes, and the association itself must hammer this same non-wavering nonsense into the dentists heads. So much so they each parroted the exact same numbers, percents, and the “one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century”. Every one of the speaking dentists said it.
But, folks, it’s the 21st century.
The dentists cited how they must treat children (3 years old) with bad dental caries. How they see these patients “every day”. Which made me wonder — what has fluoridation in the water actually done for for us? It’s been nearly a decade, so you’d think that 1/4 of the dentists would be out of business, that they’d be seeing 25% less children with bad dental caries. I didn’t hear that. Sounds like business is still booming for them. That’s great. I didn’t hear that this 9-year-test had really changed their lives, or bottom-line.
The attitudes from different professionals (not dentists) on fluoride are quite mixed up.
There are pediatricians who advise against mixing formula with fluoridated water. The European food guidelines (contained in the Codex Alimentarius, a collection of internationally recognized standtoothpaste-label-warningard, codes of practice, guidelines and other recommendations relating to foods, food production and food safety) insist on a warning on bottled water containing artificially added fluoride, or naturally occurring (over a set ppm), to have the warning “not for children under the age of 6” If you read the side of a toothpaste tube it has a clear warning label. “Keep out of reach of children under age 6“. ..”call Poison Control Center immediately“. Yipes!
Fluoridation has been nearly abolished in Europe, Israel and parts of Australia. Statistics gathered by the World Health Organization do not show any difference in rates of dental caries in fluoridated vs. non fluoridated countries. In the U.S., the state of Kentucky, which has been fluoridating the longest (70 years), and has 99% fluoridation of its water supply, has the worst dental health of any state in the country. John Colquhoun, the Chief Dental Officer in Auckland, NZ, studied the effects of fluoridation around the world. He discovered that people in countries with fluoridation had the worst teeth.
By all accounts (if we listen to the dentists) we should be seeing better teeth, more kids with zero cavities, right? But we aren’t.
Why? I thought about this last night. Then I realized the problem. What kid actually DRINKS TAP WATER? I see kids downing sodas. I see kids drinking from highly sweetened juice boxes. I might see them sipping from bottled water. Come to think of it, in the last decade, I don’t think I’ve ever heard a kid ask for tap water.
Maybe we should fluoridate soda and other children’s drinks. I think that might do more good. Why is no one suggesting this?
The newest studies (2000 and newer) seem to be changing from the rock-solid “we have to DO THIS” mindset of the mid-last century. Too bad the dentists seem to not be able to think out of that box. The studies done in the mid-1940’s were when kids drank water. Everyone drank water — tap water. Back in the 60’s, my grandmother would grouse at me: “You’re thirsty? Drink some WATER”. Back then, American’s didn’t drink bottled water. They didn’t down sodas by the gallon, or fruit juice.
At the council meeting I started to wonder where does OUR fluoride comes from. I can’t seem to get any clear answer — what kind of fluorine was used in the studies in the 1940’s? I know that the communities with natural fluorine — minerals seeping into the ground water — were the reason for the original “ah-ha” moment. But, have there been studies done on this other source, the modern sources, of fluoride?
“Fluorine is the world’s 13th most abundant element and constitutes 0.08% of the Earth crust. Fluoride is widely distributed in the environment, occurring in the air, soils, rocks, and water. Although fluoride is used industrially in a fluorine compound, the manufacture of ceramics, pesticides, aerosol propellants, refrigerants, glassware, and Teflon cookware, it is a generally unwanted byproduct of aluminium, fertilizer, and iron ore manufacture.” (source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3956646/)
So, what is being added to our water is a by-product of manufacturing. We’re drinking, bathing, watering our plants, feeding our livestock and pets with an industrial waste product that is being sold for a profit? Really? Who is getting rich on this nonsense, and why is the ADA pushing it? Who wins here? (Somehow I don’t think it’s us.)
It is the 21st century. So, please, lets come up with another option. Lets ask the dentists to start thinking for themselves, instead of parroting what the ADA has programmed into them. Lets get our government out of making health medication decisions for us. I want to know what the real reason small towns are being strong-armed into this crazy scheme.
Who profits from the fluoride? Where is this coming from?
Related Stories:
Port Angeles City Council decides to ask voters if they approve of adding fluoride to drinking water; question will appear on Nov. 3 ballot
PORT ANGELES — City Council members voted 4-3 Tuesday night to place an advisory measure on the Nov. 3 general election ballot asking voters if they approve of adding fluoride into the Port Angeles drinking water supply as has been done for the last 10 years.---read more
Port Angeles residents to get November nonbinding vote on fluoride in water
Forty years ago, Port Angeles residents overwhelmingly voted against fluoridating their non-fluoridated drinking water.City Council members then kept the water as it was.In the Nov. 3 general election, citizens will be asked a similar question, with one big difference: Should the city stop injecting the mineral additive into the water system after doing so for nearly a decade?---read more
THE CONTINUING SAGA OF THE COUNTY BELCHES!
It's watching a soap opera on TV on the week day afternoons at the county court house, the feud apparently isn't over as I first thought it was when news reports about the county commission blinking. I thought this little mellow drama was over, but apparently that's not the case given the recent news articles making headlines locally:
Clallam commissioners to hold public hearing on grants, but obstacles could remain
Clallam County commissioners acquiesced in part to county Treasurer Selinda Barkhuis, deciding in a Monday work session to hold a public hearing on two disputed Opportunity Fund grants that she has refused to process.---PDN
Quote: "She was not ready Monday to say she will sign warrants releasing the funds.I guess we'll have to wait and see what they do, Barkhuis, a non-practicing lawyer in her second term as treasurer, said in a later interview.I can't continue to babysit these commissioners."
Why Commissioners “blinked” by Selinda Barkhuis, County Treasurer---PORT O CALL
Quote: "On the same day I received the Prosecutor’s letter, I received an email from James Casey from the Peninsula Daily News wanting my “reaction please” to the “possibility that in refusing to approve the warrants you’ve failed to fulfill your duties as an elected official… That’s a Class B felony upon conviction of which leads to removal from office and cancellation of your license to practice law.”
Yes, Clallam County’s Good Old Bully Club was out in full force! And their message was loud and clear: PAY UP OR ELSE"
Another quote which was in the same article posted on Monday's edition of the Port of Call's story: QUOTE: Well, because during that executive session, I think, somebody must have explained to them the ramifications of RCW 36.40.130 if it turns out in court that I was right all along, and that the Commissioners had absolutely no good reason to rely on the Prosecutor’s legal opinion. Because that opinion, pardon the legalese, is nothing but a pile of crap. ---County Treasure, Selinda Barkhuis
* I re-posted the above article from Port O Call to show how the County Treasure views the current county commission.
Ex-Clallam official, commissioner spar in meeting on spending, transparency
"Former Clallam County Commissioner Mike Doherty blasted the current board for its spending policies and a possible violation; of the Open Public Meetings Act. You can come here anytime you want and rip us to shreds, and I'm going to rip you back because you're out of bounds, current Commissioner Mike Chapman told his former colleague Tuesday."---PDN
* The county seems to be getting nailed from two ends these days.
In other local news:
PORT ANGELES SENDS HEALING WORDS TO CHATTANOOGA
On Thursday, July 16, 2015, the City of Chattanooga, TN, suffered a terrible loss when a gunman shot and killed five US Marines at two different locations. Several others were also wounded in the attack. The investigation of the crime is ongoing. The gunman allegedly opened fire on the Combined Armed Forces Recruiting Center and then later entered the U.S. Naval Reserve Center where four Marines were killed by gunfire. A fifth officer later died from his injuries
Initial reports are calling those who were killed, heroes. Using skills learned in the service, they were able to secure areas and save lives, including seven people who were in the training center who no doubt survived due to the bravery and skill of the servicemen who lost their lives in the deadly shootout. They were able to keep those in the center safe from the gunman’s bullets, ultimately sacrificing their lives for the safety of others.
Three of the officers have spent time serving tours of duty abroad, including Iraq and Afghanistan. Reports list the names of the officers who died in the attack as Gunnery Sargent Thomas Sullivan, Staff Sargent David Wyatt, Lance Corporal Skip Wells, Sargent Carson Holmquist, and Petty Officer Randall Smith.
Port Angeles developed a relationship with the City of Chattanooga this past year through Outdoor Magazine’s Best Towns online contest in which Port Angeles and Chattanooga were finalists. To offer our condolences to the City of Chattanooga as they suffer from this terrible loss, the City of Port Angeles has a banner available for community members to sign. From now until 4:30 on Friday, the banner will be available at Port Angeles City Hall, across from the City Manager’s Office.
We encourage you to come by and offer your condolences to the City of Chattanooga by signing your name, and sharing words of kindness, sympathy and support.
* A press release from the city.
Cleanup at Rayonier pulp mill site in Port Angeles to be completed in another five years
Cleanup that began on the former Rayonier Inc. pulp mill site in 2000 should be completed by 2020, a top state Department of Ecology cleanup official said Tuesday.---PDN
* So in essence readers thanks to our friends from Ecology we will see this eye sore on the waterfront for another 5 years!
NEWS FROM ACROSS THE STRIAT
WHAT'S ON TAP FOR NEXT WEEK
PORT OF PORT ANGELES COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA HIGHLIGHT: Clallam Economic Development Council Contract
City of Sequim agenda highlight item: Ordinance No. 2015-012 Marijuana Moratorium
Forks City Agenda: http://www.forkswashington.org/pdf/agenda72715.pdf
DAILY DEVOTIONAL
