Arcata Citizens for Safe Drinking Water

November 9, 2006 New American Dental Association position: Infants should NOT drink fluoridated water. For more, click here.
		Arcata Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
Click here for ADA Position: Fluoride not good for infant formula Newspaper Articles and Letters to the Editor Rid Arcata's Water of Introduced Contaminants Arcata Eye, July 7, 2005 Harvard Professor misrepresented fluoride-cancer link A big story, in the mainstream press. The Text of the Proposed Safe Water Ordinance News Releases Including the May 18, 2005 press release		*Arcata Citizens for Safe Drinking Water* is a recently organized group of Arcata residents from a broad spectrum of the community who are working to improve the safety and purity of Arcata’s public water supply. We are working to create and pass a safe water drinking ordinance. The intention of this ordinance is to protect the health of the men, women, and children of Arcata by preventing the addition of any chemical that is not approved by the FDA to be added into the water for the purpose of treating people. This ordinance would not affect the use of chemicals that are used to make the water potable.
		The ordinance would set two criteria for any substance proposed for addition to our drinking water for purposes of treating people, i.e. for health claims. Before being added to Arcata's public water supply, the substance to be added would need:
		FDA approval of the substance as "safe and effective" for the health claims made. To not add to our water any contaminants that, when diluted into the water supply, would exceed California Public Health Goals for such contaminants. [Click here for more details and definitions on these two items.] Click on this link for Some Basic Questions and Answers about the need for Safe drinking water in Arcata
Partial list of Communities that have taken action for Safe Water in California: Redding Watsonville Modesto Woodside Santa Barbara Santa Cruz Escondido Redwood Valley Helix Water District Lakeside Water District Riverview Water District La Mesa Bremerton Suisun City Davis Morgan Hill Los Altos Hills
		If you have questions and comments on this important topic, please contact us at: Please scroll down to check the links below for more information on this topic and what we are doing Thank you !

Other States: Ithaca, NY Sutherlin, OR Willamina, OR Ridgefield, OR Colorado Springs, CO Bennington, Vermont Brattleboro, Vermont Lanai, Hawaii Honolulu, Hawaii Sequim, WA Kennewick, WA Flagstaff, Arizona Spokane, WA Wenatchee, WA White Salmon, WA Billings, Montana Kalispell, Montana Goldendale, WA Kodiak, Alaska Ketchikan, Alaska Palm Beach County, Florida For a complete list, with links to specific legislation and community action, click here.		"I would advise against fluoridation.. Side-effects cannot be excluded... In Sweden, the emphasis nowadays is to keep the environment as clean as possible with regard to pharmacologically active and, thus, potentially toxic substances." -- Dr. Arvid Carlsson, co-winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine (2000) Click here for more on Dr. Carlsson

		"The American Medical Association is NOT prepared to state that no harm will be done to any person by water fluoridation. The AMA has not carried out any research work, either long-term or short-term, regarding the possibility of any side effects." -- Dr. Flanagan, Assistant Director of Environmental Health, American Medical Association.

		"I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effects on a long range basis. Any attempt to use water this way is deplorable." -- Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, Past President of the American Medical Association.

		"E.P.A. should act immediately to protect the public, not just on the cancer data, but on the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis, mutagenicity and other effects." -- Dr. William Marcus, Senior Toxicologist at E.P.A.

		"Water contains a number of substances that are undesirable, and fluorides are just one of them" stated Dr. F. A. Bull, State Dental Director of Wisconsin, speaking at the Fourth Annual Conference of State Dental Directors.

Fluoride compounds in water and in supplements do not provide any significant cavity-protecting effects. All of the recent large-scale studies of water fluoridation have shown that there are no positive effects. That is why countries without fluoridation have shown an equal improvement in dental health as those with fluoridation. Even pro-fluoridation scientists admit that there is not any properly-conducted research showing that fluoride supplements help prevent cavities. (Note: Check vitamins carefully to be sure they do not include fluoride.)

Did you know?
Click on the links for more information.

* The vast majority of western Europe has rejected water fluoridation. Very interesting quotations.
* A growing body of evidence indicates that water fluoridation is both ineffective and unnecessary.
* Fluoride's 'benefits' are primarily topical, not systemic. Thus, there is no need to swallow fluoride.
* Two-thirds of US communities, when given the chance to vote, have voted against fluoridation. Over 60 US communities have rejected water fluoridation since 1999.
* Excessive exposure to fluoride has been linked to health problems, including arthritis, hip fracture, hypothyroidism, cancer, male reproductive problems, and brain disorders.
* Children are receiving too much fluoride today, not "too little". There is a need to reduce, not increase, current exposures.
* As a result of excess exposure to fluoride, near-epidemic numbers of children are developing dental fluorosis (a poisoning of tooth-forming cells).

Of specific interest to Citizens of Arcata
and Humboldt County

Information on Fluoride

Actions of other Communities
Government Studies
International Findings

EPA is opposed to Fluoride
Why EPA's Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation

Fluoride effect on Salmon
Research Review, Sept. 1994. In fluoridated areas, drinking water, obtained from surface water with an average fluoride concentration of 0.1-0.2 mg/L (16), is raised to the "optimal" level of 0.7-1.2 mgF/L by the addition of sodium fluoride, hydrofluosilicic acid, or sodium silicofluoride....from information that is available, 0.2 mgF/L in the fresh water ecosystem in the US Northwest and British Columbia appears to be the appropriate safe level for salmon species rather than 1.5 mgF/L currently accepted.

Some Basic Questions and Answers
about the need for Safewater in Arcata

Arcata Group Wants Fluoride Vote
Arcata Eye, July 26, 2004

FDA or EPA ?
Who does regulate the use of fluoride in drinking water ?

Arcatans Call for Safe Drinking Water Ordinance Times-Standard, July 23,2004

Dental Disease a Major Crisis
Times-Standard, August 1, 2004

Fluoride in the News
In other communities, around the world

Keepers of the Well.org
A highly informative website dedicated to preserving safe drinking water

Due Diligence
Total exposure to fluoride, food and beverage sources, and shifts in professional recommendations

Environmental Impact:
Washington State SEPA and Comments
Washington State Senate Bill 6672

Fluoridation On-Point
Highlights of the Congressional Investigation, with focus on the fluoridation product

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2000, response to questions posed by subcommittee of the House Committee on Science PDF (69K)
"Fluoride, when used in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or animal, is a drug that is subject to FDA regulation." "No New Drug Applitions have been approved or rejected for fluoride drugs meant for ingestion."

Letter, April 2, 1998, from EPA Director, Office of Science and Technology PDF (33K)
"In the U.S., there are no Federal safety standards which are applicable to drinking water additives, including those intended for use in fluoridating water."

On-Point: Complete Documents
U.S. Senate Statement with complete questions from the U.S. House Committee on Science and responses from the EPA, CDC, FDA, NAS and NSF

Effectiveness
Overview of: Systemic vs. Topical, Pit and Fissure Tooth Decay, Baby Bottle Tooth Decay, and Reports of Cessation of Fluoridation

Background information
Any purported benefits of fluoridation are in scientific controversy. Studies from 50 years ago do not pass muster under today's standards for safety or effectiveness. Research from the same era also "proved" cigarettes don't cause cancer. Even the AMA concedes that no studies were done to determine any side effects caused by fluoridation. [letter]

Community Rejection of Fluoridation since 1990
A list of communities in the U.S. and Canada that have chosen safe water.

Fluoride Action Network
An international coalition working to end water fluoridation and alert the public to fluoride’s health and environmental risks.

NoFluoride.com
The site for Citizens for Safe Drinking Water in Mountain View, California. Filled with information on recent studies showing relationships between fluoride and cancer. Excellent and informative reading.

TheFluorideDebate.com
In this website, The Fluoride Debate, we have juxtaposed the arguments presented by the American Dental Association (ADA) with comments from many of the independent scientists who have examined the issue with an open mind. We believe that if people take the time to read and study both sides of the fluoridation debate � especially the science that has emerged over the last ten years � they will be appalled by the practice of putting this known toxic substance into the public drinking water. The benefits have been wildly exaggerated and the risks have been downplayed.

Government Studies
In the U.S., from the U.S. military, and around the world.

Legal Action
Highlights of North American Litigation
California Court Rulings
Washington State Legal Action

Citizens' Legislative Action
Texts of citizens-initiated enacted ordinances, proposed ordinances qualified for voters' ballot, or circulating as petition; statement of reasons for enactment; news releases for initial circulation.

EPA Congressional Testimony
Dr. Hirzy, EPA Sr. Scientist, called for a "moratorium on fluoridation" as he testified before the U.S. Senate on June 29, 2000 about the dangers of water fluoridation. Citing numerous studies, he said that when the relative toxicity levels of lead, fluoride, and arsenic were compared, fluoride is slightly less toxic than arsenic and more toxic than lead. The federal maximum contaminant level (MEL) for lead is 15 parts per billion (pub), with the EPA recommending 5 pub for arsenic; yet the maximum contaminant level for fluoride has been established by EPA at 4000 pub.

Links that are listed as PDF are in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) file format. You will need Acrobat Reader to view and print these files. If you don't know if you have this installed on your system, try clicking on the link; either it will work or it won't. If you need to download and install a free copy of this useful software, click here. Let us know if you're still having difficulty.

Please report any missing, broken, or misplaced links to:
6857849 29 Nov 2006

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.