USA - Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened
Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened
By Jen Ouellette
Wed May 14, 2008, 04:00 PM EDT
YARMOUTH, MASS. -
YARMOUTH, MASS. - It’s not often that 40 percent of Yarmouth voters show up at the polls and with that kind of turnout in last week’s town election, many of those who supported the fluoridation of the town’s water are asking, “what happened?”
“My husband is a dentist and we’ve tried four times to get this by the board of health and when the board voted in favor of it, we thought we had done it,” said Sheila Gagnon one of the leaders of the pro-fluoride campaign.
Question 6 on the ballot, asking voters to affirm the Yarmouth Board of Health’s decision to fluoridate the town’s water, was soundly defeated with 1,600 voting for it and 4,895 voting against.
Gagnon said she and her husband have done research and gathered materials and presented them to the board of health on several occasions, but the board of health had never publicly acknowledged the information.
Last year, however, they had Selectman Bill Marasco in their corner who also pushed for the board to vote on the issue of fluoridating the town’s water supply.
Gagnon said there are 12 to 15 members on the committee and they haven’t yet held a meeting to discuss why they weren’t successful at the polls.
The pro-fluoride group had the support of some big names in the dental world from the Massachusetts Dental Association, Healthcare for All out of Boston and many of the local dentist’s offices.
The group sent out a mailing of more than 5,000 flyers to people who had voted in the February primary and had signs and buttons printed supporting fluoride in the water.
“We went out to speak to different groups at the senior center, parents groups and had our brochure translated into Portuguese and got it out to the churches,” Gagnon said.
She said one problem with their awareness campaign was being forced to spend so much time countering myths about fluoridation.
“The media, as you know, does the pro and the con. But in a scientific situation like this, it’s not just opinion against opinion. It’s fact against partial fact or even hysteria,” she said, adding they only had about four months to launch an educational campaign regarding piles of scientific research.
In addition, Gagnon said the big issue ballot questions and tough economic times might have put voters in a negative mood.
“The two ballot questions for the schools didn’t pass and they didn’t even pass Question 7, which was a non-binding question. They didn’t even want to hear about new curbside trash collection options. It was just a very negative thing.”
Vi Pacitto, spokeswoman for the opponents to fluoride, said the proof is in the passion.
“This was a group of individuals that banded together and spread the word and believed in it with all their heart,” Pacitto said.
She said her group began with about 15 or 20 people and grew to more than 50.
Pacitto said they created homemade signs and had a few printed up, but their efforts were mainly comprised of public outreach activities.
“It was something that took over my life and the last few weeks have been extremely hectic. I swear I’ve gone around with a phone attached to my ear,” Pacitto said.
She said they were even surprised by the response of the voters, who defeated the question soundly.
“I honestly wanted it to be overwhelming to send a message, but I did not think it would be as overwhelming as it was and that was extremely gratifying,” Pacitto said.
Pacitto said she’s not done.
“There is something on the books now saying [the state] wants to fluoridate all of our water. We want to take that off the books and replace it with a mandate saying they cannot put fluoride in the water in Massachusetts,” Pacitto said.
“When you try to force something on a population, that is the wrong thing to do. Everyone has a choice,” she said.
Meanwhile, those in favor of fluoride in the water say they are not done with their fight either. While state law mandates fluoridation cannot be ordered again by the board of health for two years, the group plans to maintain the Web site, moresmilesaroundyarmouth.org and education efforts.
“Residents can go on that site any time and see what’s happening, and if and when it ever comes up again the general public will be more informed,” said Gagnon.
Comments (4)
Thank you for the abuse report. We will review the report and take appropriate action.
Loading comments, please wait...
nyscof2 days ago
Report Abuse
It's sad that the fluoridationists are so unaware of the current science showing that even small amounts of fluoride can be harmful to some people.
Instead of evaluating their political defeat based on their PR efforts, we wish the would actually evaluate the fluoride toxicology data neatly wrapped and available on line produced at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency to the National Research Council. It's here
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571
Every person who actively pursues fluoridation via legislation is required to read this book first otherwise you are just operating on hearsay.
If you don't understand it, then you have no right to force fluoridation on those who do.
Jim Schultz1 day ago
Report Abuse
See Yoder km 2007 study of dental professionals to understand that only 17% of dentist in Indiana understood the science of fluoride and reminerization after eruption and how this is a topical effect. Most still believed the disproved theory of preeruption ingested benefit which was the theory when they went to school. In Illinois only 14% got it right . Detroit schools with the worst graduation rate in the nation rate a 25% to graduate. I strongly believe dentists have the ability to read the current science just not the desire. I will pray for the children until the dentists are better able to advise them on fluoride science and risk of dental fluorosis. The ADA interm guideline on infant formula from Nov 9, 2006 still is not getting out to the public and most Health departments ignore it as they do the CDC and FDA warnings. I have not found WIC or health start giving notice of this risk either. I found out on my computer on Nov 9,2006 but it took my dentist mayor 2 weeks before he could believe it. In Ireland they voted 9-0 for a warning in 2000 only to reverse the finding when warned it would mean the end of fluoridation to admit childrens teeth are damaged. In Florida I was told because dental fluorosis is not a medical effect they keep no records of it and would not discuss it. Honesty is required for informed consent . Knowledge is required for informed consent. That would be a small step in the right direction. See fluoridealert.org for the science and the real reasearch not the 60 year old theory as fact. Jim Schultz
Jim Schultz6 hours ago
Report Abuse
I found a new really excellent quality site with lots of videos and non conflict style information based on solid current science. Some really excellent power point material keeping the points basic. Canada and Ireland both have been trying to slow down explosing of dental fluorosis by reducing fluoride level in water and seem to be heading for .6ppm now. Canada now advises no fluoride supplements for kids and no fluoride toothpaste before 7. The cost of dental fluorosis repair now exceeds any claimed benefit which is like saying owing 300,000 on a 200.000 house is a good thing. Ingested fluorides benefit is too small for the russian roulet by people that do not know of any risk. Safe for all and everyone benefits makes a good slogan but was never true. Kids need dentists and good nutrition (Burt 2007) and the poor kids with most of the problems get neither. Lets work together and solve the real problem. Being very cheap and huge promises make it so inviting. The fluoridated cities are now having large increases of cavities and much is the ugly baby bottle tooth with fluoride no help at all. Parents need skils and less soda and chips that Burt found the basic diet with fluoridated tap water not bottled. Jim Schultz
jim Schultz6 hours ago
Waterloowatch.com is that site and it has real class by good people and a 1979 canadian study showing cancer risks with data and little benefit. Advises to not fluoridate as good policy.
By Jen Ouellette
Wed May 14, 2008, 04:00 PM EDT
YARMOUTH, MASS. -
YARMOUTH, MASS. - It’s not often that 40 percent of Yarmouth voters show up at the polls and with that kind of turnout in last week’s town election, many of those who supported the fluoridation of the town’s water are asking, “what happened?”
“My husband is a dentist and we’ve tried four times to get this by the board of health and when the board voted in favor of it, we thought we had done it,” said Sheila Gagnon one of the leaders of the pro-fluoride campaign.
Question 6 on the ballot, asking voters to affirm the Yarmouth Board of Health’s decision to fluoridate the town’s water, was soundly defeated with 1,600 voting for it and 4,895 voting against.
Gagnon said she and her husband have done research and gathered materials and presented them to the board of health on several occasions, but the board of health had never publicly acknowledged the information.
Last year, however, they had Selectman Bill Marasco in their corner who also pushed for the board to vote on the issue of fluoridating the town’s water supply.
Gagnon said there are 12 to 15 members on the committee and they haven’t yet held a meeting to discuss why they weren’t successful at the polls.
The pro-fluoride group had the support of some big names in the dental world from the Massachusetts Dental Association, Healthcare for All out of Boston and many of the local dentist’s offices.
The group sent out a mailing of more than 5,000 flyers to people who had voted in the February primary and had signs and buttons printed supporting fluoride in the water.
“We went out to speak to different groups at the senior center, parents groups and had our brochure translated into Portuguese and got it out to the churches,” Gagnon said.
She said one problem with their awareness campaign was being forced to spend so much time countering myths about fluoridation.
“The media, as you know, does the pro and the con. But in a scientific situation like this, it’s not just opinion against opinion. It’s fact against partial fact or even hysteria,” she said, adding they only had about four months to launch an educational campaign regarding piles of scientific research.
In addition, Gagnon said the big issue ballot questions and tough economic times might have put voters in a negative mood.
“The two ballot questions for the schools didn’t pass and they didn’t even pass Question 7, which was a non-binding question. They didn’t even want to hear about new curbside trash collection options. It was just a very negative thing.”
Vi Pacitto, spokeswoman for the opponents to fluoride, said the proof is in the passion.
“This was a group of individuals that banded together and spread the word and believed in it with all their heart,” Pacitto said.
She said her group began with about 15 or 20 people and grew to more than 50.
Pacitto said they created homemade signs and had a few printed up, but their efforts were mainly comprised of public outreach activities.
“It was something that took over my life and the last few weeks have been extremely hectic. I swear I’ve gone around with a phone attached to my ear,” Pacitto said.
She said they were even surprised by the response of the voters, who defeated the question soundly.
“I honestly wanted it to be overwhelming to send a message, but I did not think it would be as overwhelming as it was and that was extremely gratifying,” Pacitto said.
Pacitto said she’s not done.
“There is something on the books now saying [the state] wants to fluoridate all of our water. We want to take that off the books and replace it with a mandate saying they cannot put fluoride in the water in Massachusetts,” Pacitto said.
“When you try to force something on a population, that is the wrong thing to do. Everyone has a choice,” she said.
Meanwhile, those in favor of fluoride in the water say they are not done with their fight either. While state law mandates fluoridation cannot be ordered again by the board of health for two years, the group plans to maintain the Web site, moresmilesaroundyarmouth.org and education efforts.
“Residents can go on that site any time and see what’s happening, and if and when it ever comes up again the general public will be more informed,” said Gagnon.
Comments (4)
Thank you for the abuse report. We will review the report and take appropriate action.
Loading comments, please wait...
nyscof2 days ago
Report Abuse
It's sad that the fluoridationists are so unaware of the current science showing that even small amounts of fluoride can be harmful to some people.
Instead of evaluating their political defeat based on their PR efforts, we wish the would actually evaluate the fluoride toxicology data neatly wrapped and available on line produced at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency to the National Research Council. It's here
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571
Every person who actively pursues fluoridation via legislation is required to read this book first otherwise you are just operating on hearsay.
If you don't understand it, then you have no right to force fluoridation on those who do.
Jim Schultz1 day ago
Report Abuse
See Yoder km 2007 study of dental professionals to understand that only 17% of dentist in Indiana understood the science of fluoride and reminerization after eruption and how this is a topical effect. Most still believed the disproved theory of preeruption ingested benefit which was the theory when they went to school. In Illinois only 14% got it right . Detroit schools with the worst graduation rate in the nation rate a 25% to graduate. I strongly believe dentists have the ability to read the current science just not the desire. I will pray for the children until the dentists are better able to advise them on fluoride science and risk of dental fluorosis. The ADA interm guideline on infant formula from Nov 9, 2006 still is not getting out to the public and most Health departments ignore it as they do the CDC and FDA warnings. I have not found WIC or health start giving notice of this risk either. I found out on my computer on Nov 9,2006 but it took my dentist mayor 2 weeks before he could believe it. In Ireland they voted 9-0 for a warning in 2000 only to reverse the finding when warned it would mean the end of fluoridation to admit childrens teeth are damaged. In Florida I was told because dental fluorosis is not a medical effect they keep no records of it and would not discuss it. Honesty is required for informed consent . Knowledge is required for informed consent. That would be a small step in the right direction. See fluoridealert.org for the science and the real reasearch not the 60 year old theory as fact. Jim Schultz
Jim Schultz6 hours ago
Report Abuse
I found a new really excellent quality site with lots of videos and non conflict style information based on solid current science. Some really excellent power point material keeping the points basic. Canada and Ireland both have been trying to slow down explosing of dental fluorosis by reducing fluoride level in water and seem to be heading for .6ppm now. Canada now advises no fluoride supplements for kids and no fluoride toothpaste before 7. The cost of dental fluorosis repair now exceeds any claimed benefit which is like saying owing 300,000 on a 200.000 house is a good thing. Ingested fluorides benefit is too small for the russian roulet by people that do not know of any risk. Safe for all and everyone benefits makes a good slogan but was never true. Kids need dentists and good nutrition (Burt 2007) and the poor kids with most of the problems get neither. Lets work together and solve the real problem. Being very cheap and huge promises make it so inviting. The fluoridated cities are now having large increases of cavities and much is the ugly baby bottle tooth with fluoride no help at all. Parents need skils and less soda and chips that Burt found the basic diet with fluoridated tap water not bottled. Jim Schultz
jim Schultz6 hours ago
Waterloowatch.com is that site and it has real class by good people and a 1979 canadian study showing cancer risks with data and little benefit. Advises to not fluoridate as good policy.
posted by Bill at
10:05 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home