Contact Us   •   About Us   •   Advertise   •   Sitemap   Subscriber Services   •   Skagit Valley Herald E-Edition  
   
 Opinion
      Search goskagit:        


Let’s go ahead with fluoridation for dental health

Skagit Valley Herald
March 29, 2008 - 10:03 AM


Comments (45)   |   Email Story   |   Print Story   |   Share This Story: [?] del.icio.us Digg Google Bookmarks NewsVine StumbleUpon YahooMyWeb
ADVERTISEMENT:
There can be no more excuses for the Skagit County Public Utility District not to proceed with the fluoridation of its water supplies as a measure to improve the dental health of its customers.

Attorney General Rob McKenna has said that the county commissioners, acting as the Board of Health, did have the authority to order the PUD to fluoridate, even if the order was dependent upon funding from a third party.

In the PUD’s case, the Washington Dental Service Foundation has offered to pay up to $1.2 million to install the systems needed to fluoridate the water.

While McKenna’s opinion, issued a few days ago, is nonbinding, it should be clear to the PUD that the county would prevail should the matter go to court. It shouldn’t come to that.

We would hope that the PUD board is not made timid by the ferocity of the anti-fluoride forces, some of whom have rather bizarre theories about the motives behind well-meaning efforts to reduce dental disease in the community.

The order to the PUD was issued in June, after a 2-1 vote of the county commissioners. Sharon Dillon, who voted against the measure, now says that the issue should be considered settled and the order to fluoridate carried out.

It took the county commissioners long enough to get to the point of issuing the order. The advisory vote taken within the PUD boundaries reflecting only 53 percent approval of the fluoridation proposal didn’t offer the commissioners as much comfort as they would have liked.

But proceed they did — only to have to buck resistance from the PUD board. Now, the state’s attorney general has issued an opinion addressing every question the PUD officials had, and all the answers supported the county’s right to order fluoridation.

The objections of the anti-fluoride groups notwithstanding, if the advice of the American Dental Association can’t be believed, whose can? And the ADA says fluoride in the proper amounts has reduced tooth decay in many communities by as much as 40 percent.

Some commenters on the goskagit.com stories about the water-quality contest held Thursday at Skagit PUD suggested that the taste of local water would suffer by comparison to other areas should the agency fluoridate.

Skagit PUD, which took first place in the competition last year, failed to finish in the top three after a panel of tasters sampled the water of seven different purveyors. The winner — the city of Everett with its fluoridated water system.

* Editorials reflect the consensus opinion of the editorial board and are written by its members: Publisher L. Stedem Wood, Editor Don Nelson and City Editor Dick Clever. Signed columns reflect the authors’ viewpoints.

More from opinion
Most Recent

Most Commented

Most Read



Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 29, 2008 - 05:57 PM

You have got to be kidding me. If you want fluoride get it from your dentist.
I suggest the young women who may read this to look up a comdition called "perioral dermatis." It is a very unsightly condition related to fluoride use in toothpaste. You are going to be washing your face with the water aren't you. Do you know if your skin is allergic to flouride? Well you are about to find out. Or just ask a dermatologist about it because you may have to make an appointment with one of those instead of the dentist. I am allergic to fluoride and I can not use fluoridated toothpaste or my skin will brake out so bad I don't want to leave the house. You may not be allergic to fluoride now but when you drink it everyday you may find out that you are.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 10:52 AM

You may as well face it, keri555, the guys who wrote this editorial don’t care if you drop dead from a fluoride reaction. They probably believe that if ten people are killed to save a hundred it’s a bargain. As for the “ferocity” of anti-fluoridation groups, it’s matched only by the deep pockets of corporate interests and power hungry public policy makers who are the driving forces behind the push to unload commercial-grade toxic waste on an unsuspecting public. At least our “bizarre theories” are backed with documented fact as opposed to the editors’ blind faith endorsement of lobbyist groups, such as the ADA, and their unsubstantiated claims. (continued below)
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 10:53 AM

Former WDSF CEO Tracy Garland convicted herself and exposed the true motivation behind the dumping of fluoride on Skagit County in her Nov 2005 speech before the Grantmakers in Health in Washington, DC. Public health was mentioned only in passing. The focus of her entire presentation was on corporate giving and “Adventures in Public Policy Grantmaking.” See http://www.skagitcleanwater.org/fluoride-101/gih-tracy-garland.html . Does the editors’ steadfast belief in the ADA include the group’s admission that infants whose formula is mixed with fluoridated water run the risk of being overdosed? The feeble warning posted at its site (http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/positions/statements/fluoride_infants.asp ) would be found in a back page corner if printed in the SVH.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 10:55 AM

Accuracy doesn’t seem to be much of a concern for this newspaper, either. I was misquoted in Friday’s print edition. Resignation is voluntary; removal from office is not. I suggested the former to the reporter. My guess is that the editors “cleaned up” her copy. If the editors are still commenting on Proposition 2 in the next few years, readers might see that the “yes” vote has inched its way up to 60%! According to the Skagit County Auditor’s Office, it was 52.07% ( http://www.skagitcounty.net/AuditorElections/HTML/archives/HTML/cumulativelast.html ). Also, it is untrue that balloting was limited to the PUD service area. There was a sizeable number of votes cast by people who were unaffected by the fluoridation proposal. With those removed, the “yes” vote dropped to 51%.
Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 30, 2008 - 11:01 AM

I think that it is true that they do not care but they would feel different about the entire thing if they themselves or someone they loved had an allergy to fluoride. I think it is completely selfish to try and force this issue. I can choose not to drink the water but I do have to take a shower in it and so does my family. When it starts to affect their skin and only then will they realize it's not so good for me or them.
Report Violation  Posted by dan litton  on  March 30, 2008 - 11:04 AM

I believe the editor doesn't live in Skagit County so the flouride in his home water doesn't affect him. Did I read that Commissioner Dillon says to move ahead and floridate? Sounds to me like she's giving in.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 11:47 AM

Dan, I would have to ask Sharon if she was quoted inaccurately the way I was, as stated above. I spent 15 minutes on the phone with Franny White the day before Friday’s print article was published. I went into great detail about my own endocrine system failure and how fluoridated water leads to undiagnosed hypothyroidism. I had doctors shove Prozac down my throat for years, telling me that I was chronically fatigued because I was “depressed.”
Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 30, 2008 - 01:16 PM

The bottom line is that it is not necessary and there is so much factual information to support this. There are too many people buying into this and are deceived just because a dentist said it's a good thing. You don't think that somehow they are benefiting from this. Not so many cavities and stronger teeth means less patients. There has to be some sort of a kick-back or pay off for the dental idustry.
Report Violation  Posted by Irtnog  on  March 30, 2008 - 01:32 PM

Government has no right to force medication on the citizens unless it's to vaccinate people against communicable diseases.

If the fluoridation goes through I'll start buying bottled water for drinking and cooking and deduct the cost of this bottled water from my monthly PUD bill.
Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 30, 2008 - 01:56 PM

Good idea.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:14 PM

The PUD is not at fault. Homeowners could deduct the cost of a high price distillation unit from their property taxes. Let’s think about renters’ options. We should all be marching on the County Commissioners’ building and demand Ken Dahlstedt’s removal from office for violation of his vow of impartiality in his Oath of Office! His undying support of fluoridation goes all the way back before it became an issue. It is documented in the SVH beginning in early 2005. His vote is unlawful!
Report Violation  Posted by Irtnog  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:22 PM

After spending quite a bit of time on the Skagit Clean Water website it's my opinion that the whole "oath of office" and "bond" argument is detrimental to the fight against fluoride. It not only takes away from the main issue but it gives the pro-fluoride camp ammunition to make the anti-fluoride people look like nutcases. I believe the fight should be focused on fluoride and the political debate left for another day.

Just my opinion.
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:33 PM

If the editor of the Skagit Valley Herald ever decided to attend a PUD meeting he would realize that the PUD commissioners are not easily intimidated, I think he is just trying to bait them.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:45 PM

Irtnog, What good is the law if it’s not enforced. Do you like a corrupt government? They got Capone on tax evasion. Here’s the deal. Remove the unlawful Commissioner and the fluoridation mandate is gone. What’s so difficult about that concept? The corporate court system is most likely going to rule in favor of the pro-fluoridationists if you continue with the age-old battle of: Is fluoridation good or bad? What is it that you think they haven’t heard yet?
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:47 PM

Irtnog,
Whatever way it takes to keep poison out of our water is the way we should go.
My sister flew Paul Connett here from the eastcoast (world renown authority on fluoride) and Munks and Dahlstedt refused to attend the meeting, we have given them stacks of information on the health risks of fluoride, we have had meetings with them until they refused to even see us. We have had doctors and dentists out to speak on the dangers of fluoride. Dahlstedts mind was made up as far back 2005. So ya just gotta wonder, why do they want it in our water? So Irtnog, how would you suggest we get through to them?
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:50 PM

The fact is they are not lawfully in office and, therefore, they don't have the right to make the decision.
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:55 PM

Hmmm...I wonder if Delta Dental has to pay for fluoride treatments if the water is fluoridated? I guess I will give them a call tomorrow.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:56 PM

Another alternative is to recruit people for the county commissioners’ seats who are against fluoridation and who will overturn Resolution #20070284 as their first order of business when elected.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 02:59 PM

One of the reasons that Delta Dental/Washington Dental Service Foundation wants fluoride in the water so badly is that they won’t have to be paying out on fluoride tablets anymore. The health department quit handing out free tablets so that the public would demand that it be put in the water.
Report Violation  Posted by Irtnog  on  March 30, 2008 - 05:49 PM

I'm just saying the claims that the Commissioners took office illegally clouds the fluoride issue. It's like fighting a war on two fronts.

My opinion.
Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 30, 2008 - 06:17 PM

Are they prepared to take responsiblity for any health problems that may effect the public? Are they aware that they could be subject to lawsuits concerning the fluoride and it's effects on the public's health?
Report Violation  Posted by keri555  on  March 30, 2008 - 06:34 PM

Another point to make is that if it happens, and you choose to drink bottled water, those plastic bottled water bottles are one of the most destructive things today for our enviroment. People who are trying to make a difference are going to be forced to purchace bottled water. The people who seem to be concerned about the enviroment coincidentally are the same people who are concerned about what they put into their bodies and their children's bodies.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  March 30, 2008 - 09:33 PM

It looks to me as though the fluoridation issue is already about as cloudy as it can get with people continuing to use the same approach over and over again and expecting different results. It’s going to take a Congressional investigation to turn that around. Has anyone bothered to read all ten pages of McKenna’s “opinion”? For one thing, he points to a 1954 court case, Kaul v. Chehalis, where some judges like Faith Ireland, Bobbe Bridge, and Mary Fairhurst ruled that fluoridation is not “medical treatment that impinges upon constitutionally-protected liberty interests.” It doesn’t get any better. Washington’s corporate court system doesn’t care that there has been another 54 years of scientific research since Kaul.
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  March 31, 2008 - 05:51 AM

Irtnog,
If you have ideas that you think would get through to munks and dahlstedt I would really like to hear them, and I am serious. We have been bashing our heads against a wall for 4 years to no avail. They have their own agenda and its not about our health either.
Report Violation  Posted by *shrug*  on  March 31, 2008 - 03:07 PM

They're so fond of telling us how great this fluoride will be, why aren't they telling us where it will come from?

Page 1 of 2        1 2 >

Have something to say? Add your comment!

You must be a logged in member in order to comment.
Don't have an account? Sign up here. It's simple and free!



Auto-login on future visits

Forgot your password?











ADVERTISEMENT:
  © 2007 Skagit Valley Publishing Company Privacy Policy | Terms of Use