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


Meetings need to bring progress on fluoridation

Skagit Valley Herald
November 17, 2007 - 12:23 PM


Comments (7)   |   Email Story   |   Print Story   |   Share This Story: [?] del.icio.us Digg Google Bookmarks NewsVine StumbleUpon YahooMyWeb
ADVERTISEMENT:
In what passes for progress, the Skagit County PUD commissioners and county commissioners have agreed to a face-to-face palaver about how to get moving on fluoridation of the PUD’s water system.

The county commissioners asked for, and got, what amounted to a survey of attitudes about fluoridation. A nonbinding ballot question generated a favorable response from 52 percent of the voters within the utility district. The county commissioners have voted for fluoridation. The money to build the plant is available.

What apparently remains in dispute is who will build the plant. The PUD says it’s prepared to operate it but isn’t in the plant construction business. The county has proceeded under the assumption that PUD would build and operate the plant.

It’s understandable if Skagit residents who are waiting for something to happen see all of this as a foot-dragging, responsibility-dodging drama with no end in sight. We’re glad to see the two boards meeting for more discussion — but as the issue drags on, talk is no longer cheap.

* 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 Jo Roark  on  November 17, 2007 - 04:42 PM

What also remains is who is going to pay for the rest of the project, I don't want it so I am not paying for it. I think that the people that don't want contaminants in their water should have to pay. I need all my money so I can put in a well if need be. I have no choice since my sister has bone cancer and fluoride causes bone cancer, I am afraid for her life.
Let's not forget that people outside of PUD district #1 were allowed to vote, so the vote was skewed.
This issue is far from over...
Report Violation  Posted by Microsoft Retiree  on  November 18, 2007 - 12:44 PM

I believe that the School Districts served by PUD should be included. There is hard science indicating that fluoriation causes high lead levels (above federal standards). The schools are obligated to provide safe drinking water as well as special needs for students that are affected by lead levels. Are we placing a major cost on future School District levees?
Report Violation  Posted by richiem999  on  November 19, 2007 - 12:46 PM

There is NO HARD SCIENCE linking fluoridation to bone cancer, high lead levels or any other health risks, no matter what you may read here or on any of the anti-fluoridation propaganda web sites. Every bogus claim such as these has been refuted with solid scientific evidence.
Report Violation  Posted by Microsoft Retiree  on  November 19, 2007 - 01:04 PM

So the US National Library of Medicine being provided by the National Institue of Health is a 'anti-fluoridation propanda web site' that we are funding with our tax dollars???? I gather you feel that there is no HARD SCIENCE to the theory that the earth in round, or there is global warming. How is Elvis doing?

I have a M.S., taught science in high schools and university; what training do you have?

For your review:
Neurotoxicology. 2007 Sep;28(5):1023-31. Epub 2007 Jun 30.

Go to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez and enter "17697714". Please provide your citation refuting this study.
Report Violation  Posted by Don Johnson  on  November 19, 2007 - 02:38 PM

“Safe and effective! Safe and effective!” There’s not much else to the pro-fluoridationists’ reasoning -- certainly no double-blind studies to back it up. It is an historical medical fact that fluoride was once the standard treatment for HYPERthyroidism and in much lower dosage than is added to drinking water supplies. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to figure out what fluoridated water has done over time to the thyroid glands of once-healthy people in Anacortes. HYPOthyroidism is misdiagnosed routinely as “depression” because standard blood tests do not reveal the subclinical variety. I know that firsthand. Now, look at all of the people out there on antidepressants. Surprise! Prozac, etc., contain fluoride! Now, Munks & Dahlstedt, look at the sick people get even more sick!
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  November 19, 2007 - 08:25 PM

HA! Isn't that just typical of a pro-fluoride person. Where is your solid scientific evidence Richiem999? Is it the same secret evidence the health department, Munks and Dahlstedt and the WDSF have? Or is your evidence a bunch of endorsements as well? Hmmm? I don't expect you to answer, no pro fluoride people ever do.They come out and say the anti fluoridationists are wrong and then go back into hiding, fearful of a real debate. Fluoride causes bone cancer, that is a fact. Fluoride causes endocrine system problems, that is a fact. Fluoride causes osteoporosis, that is a fact. Fluoride causes fluoride poisoning, that is a fact and damages the pineal gland and also damages teeth (fluorosis), I know because my niece and grandson have it.
Report Violation  Posted by Jo Roark  on  November 20, 2007 - 04:54 PM

I wonder where Richiem999 is with all of his solid scientific evidence?

Page 1 of 1      

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