- Even the Davis County residents who voted for water fluoridation
two years ago should be happy that opponents are close to forcing the issue
back onto the ballot this fall. The additive most people assumed they would
be getting -- the pharmaceutical-grade sodium fluoride found in toothpaste,
pills and dental treatments -- is not the stuff flowing from taps today
in the county's southern end. Instead, the Weber Basin Water Conservancy
District took a more economical path and bought fluorosilicic acid.
-
- Those who had visions of sterile white laboratories when
they voted for fluoride weren't thinking of fluorosilicic acid. Improbable
as this sounds, much of it is recovered from the scrubbing solution that
scours toxins from smokestacks at phosphate fertilizer plants. Water fluoridation
has turned a tremendous hazardous-waste disposal expense into a multimillion-dollar
profit for fertilizer manufacturers.
-
- Now stop and think about the nonsensical mechanics of
that scheme for a moment: The Environmental Protection Agency wouldn't
allow a bucket of this stuff to be poured directly into the Great Salt
Lake, yet many tons will flow there in coming years via Davis County wastewater
alone. As long as some of it passes through people first, the EPA rules
against dumping waste are suspended.
-
- The amount that reaches your water tap is relatively
small, about about 1 part per million (ppm), yet it's worth noting that
the EPA's limit for lead in the water is only 0.015 ppm -- and lead is
less toxic than fluorosilicic acid. Arsenic is only a few times more toxic,
yet its EPA water limit is about 400 times smaller than the acid's. Fluoridation
proponents call such comparisons irrelevant because they say the acid has
been used for years with no proven ill effects. But they can't provide
more than this anecdotal assurance because fluorosilicic acid -- unlike
the fluoride in your toothpaste -- has never been subject to serious toxicological
study by the government. The EPA's ranking chemist confirmed that mind-boggling
oversight to The Tribune last week.
-
- The private sector, on the other hand, has stepped up
in recent years to fill the scientific void. A 1999 Dartmouth College study
-- linking fluorosilicic acid to high uptakes of lead in children -- is
one of several that have raised red flags about the acid. The few public
health officials who are even aware of this research are quick to dismiss
it, but at the very least the study authors have attempted to apply some
scientific method to the question of the acid's safety. Lacking valid research
to support their own position on fluorosilicic acid, the best that the
public health politicos can do is tell you, "Other cities have been
using it for years." That, folks, is not science.
-
- If you voted for lab-tested fluoride and not some factory's
toxic swill, you should thank opponents for hanging with this issue and
giving you another chance to choose. ___
-
- Also see: http://www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk/pollution.htm
http://www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk/bfs_letters.htm http://www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk/elixir.html
-
- Jane Jones Campaign Director National Pure Water Association
|
