Before we begin, let’s be clear: this blog post isn’t about whether fluoride should or shouldn’t be added to London’s tap water. I haven’t closely read much on the subject and I have no arguments for or against it.
What I do want to discuss is who should be making the call on water fluoridation. And, more specifically, who shouldn’t be making it.
The issue of water fluoridation has once again arrived on London city council’s doorstep, and politicians have quite rightly decided to hold a public meeting to hear from citizens who believe the tooth-toughening chemical, added to city water since the 1960s, can cause health issues, including some serious ones.
London’s top two public-health officials, Dr. Graham Pollett and Dr. Bryna Warshawsky? They dismiss the notion, saying any health risks would only be possible with fluoride levels dramatically higher than what’s in London drinking water. Keep fluoride, they say.
But some city councillors are clearly interested in voting it out of our water supply.
So I ask you: Do you really want a politician, such as Denise Brown, making a public-health decision that rejects the advice of actual doctors like Pollett and Warshawsky? If your answer is honestly yes, then you’re probably qualified to host CJBK’s mid-morning talk show (and if you think that’s a compliment, it’s not).
Again, this is not about fluoride-good or fluoride-bad. It’s about who’s qualified to make the call.
To underscore the point, let’s reverse the whole thing: Imagine Warshawsky and Pollett came to council with concerns about fluoride, saying they’re no longer convinced it should be used due to health risks. Now imagine if council said no, we’re not interested in your advice – the fluoride stays.
Would that be OK with you? That’s the principle at work here.
So yes, I know: a guy who works for the city puts the fluoride into the water, which gives council the right to vote on its removal. But is that really wise?
And maybe you think this is just another tiny issue that will go away. Not so fast — I’ve been surprised by some of the councillors who’ve told me they have questions about fluoride’s safety. A council-directed end to water fluoridation sounds to me like a possibility.
Recently, on am980′s McArthur in the Morning radio show, Dr. Bryna Warshawsky, Director, Oral Health, Communicable Disease and Sexual Health Services at the Middlesex-London Health Unit, stated there’s no evidence whatsoever that water fluoridation is harmful to one’s health.
Is this woman living in a bubble?
In fact, the evidence is overwhelming that water fluoridation is indeed harmful to one’s health.
My guess is the Middlesex-London Health Unit has to tow the Health Canada and Ontario Ministry of Health party line or risk funding cuts via the province.
See article here, noting the scores of referenced studies at the bottom of the article: http://www.fluoridealert.org/limeback.htm
When our public health officials, for whatever reason, sell us a bill of goods, we have no choice but to deal with our elected officials who are empowered under the Ontario Fluoridation Act to take action. MLHU officials can only make recommendations to elected officials.
It is absolutely pathetic that time is being wasted on this. Fluoridation is supported by all of the same National, Provincial, and Municipal Health organizations that make recommendations on everything from soup to nuts…that people just can’t wait to support and fund and implement. And now we get a mad scientist or two, some “I read it on the Internet and so it must be true” wingnuts, a loud talk show host or two; and some gullible media who are too prone to reporting instead of doing the right thing……….and we have a huge controversy. The public meeting will be more of the same blah-blah-blah that will get reported as fact and how fluoride is a worldwide epidemic in progress and the crescendo will grow louder.
Meanwhile, London’s unemployment is approaching 10%; the National unemployment picture is not much better; factory employment is at the lowes point in recorded history; Canadians have a record level of household DEBT!; more than 11% of London households receive Ontario Works (26% of East London households); Food Bank use is soaring and donors can barely keep up; the Police want a 3% raise (to be followed shortly by the overworked and underpaid firefighters) and there isn’t a politician around who will do anything concrete about it; and the economy won’t be recovering as it has in the past…..period! And here we are wasting time and money on discussions about the very fluoridation that saves families money on their dental bills? And on a subject that ought to be a Province-wide matter and not subject to an organized mugging City by City?????
Where on earth did our politicians (at every level) lose their sense of focus?????
Politicians HAVE been making public health decisions since humans first began electing leaders to take our money and make decisions on how that is spent, what is qualified under any public program and what is prohibited and by removing from us any choice on our health care access and decisions.
Are they trying to make a public health decision or say that it is not the role of MUNICIPAL governments to be putting additives in our water, especially in the face of doubts about its adverse effects or benefits when we don’t know what interactions occur in the stew of chemicals in our water and its effects on individuals who, presumably, are all not made-to-order of one chemical composition.
We are broke and if there are doubts about the necessity of fluoride then it’s best to save costs there.
Fluoride is readily available to one and all in our “free” public health system to have it prescribed to each person who has a hankering or a true need for fluoride. Public drinking water is not the only method of delivery.
And finally – why are you not asking questions about the true abuses of public health funds. I’ve got a huge list of questions if you’re at a loss for ideas and if the LFP wants to stop dealing with trivia and make itself relevant once again by actually doing some highly-risky activity by challenging issues that affect us in ways that are irrevocable.
If this is not posted without editing you will confirm it is time for me to withdraw the last shred of respect I have for the LFP which is dwindling even more quickly not only among those of all my acquaintance but even among those I hear talking in the waiting lines at the grocery store. Everyone laments the emptiness of LFP’s content which is continually deteriorating.
As for your comrade in pro-fluoride arms while claiming to be neutral – Ian Gillespie’s selectivity in how he contextualizes Denise Brown’s comments are grossly irresponsible and ridicule her in a thoroughly unacceptable manner.
He makes the leap from one rations statement she makes that there is NOT universal acceptance of the benefits of fluoride and the selective use of studies whose funding we do not know – and then Gillespie takes take he makes the far greater and more egregious abuse of the selectivity of quotes and examples and applies them in the most irresponsible and juvenile taunting of Denise Brown.
Get off your high horses guys – because you may get knocked down anyway by the consumers. You may want to tread more lightly as you put your foot in the stirrups and rise up on the high horse in future.
That some of you still presume to call yourselves journalists is fine – but that does not give you license to promote a continued practice that MAY BE IN QUESTION and is not the role of a municipal government.
Sorry you feel that way, Leila. Journalists in this newsroom work harder & show more commitment to readers now than at any other time in this newspaper’s history. But I digress.
Barry: Am I right to take from your comments that you believe public-health officials are putting public health at risk to appease federal government officials?
Sorta reminds me of the pesticide ban. Even though Health Canada said home pesticides were safe if used correctly, our elected officials caved into the loud minority and now I have a lawn full of weeds every summer. And I still can’t figure out if pesticides were so bad, why did the politicians exclude city-owned golf courses from the ban? Loss of revenue perhaps? Hypocrisy….you bet!
The answer to your question–Am I right to take from your comments that you believe public-health officials are putting public health at risk to appease federal government officials from my research is YES and I KNOW that to be true.
They are giving us tooth medicine without control of dose, informed consent and regulation. How much fluoride in a pea-sized piece of fluoridated tooth paste where you are told not to swallow and in the US they tell you to go to a poison control center if swallowed, and the amount of fluoride in an 8 ounce glass of London’s water? Answer: Both the same. How much city water do you drink a day? Come to the Public Participation Meeting on January 25, 2012 to learn something important Patrick and Gord.
Sorry Kallie…..I wouldn’t waste my time on that nonsense. Like I said……it’s a shame that activists have to take up the valuable time of City politicians at such a critical time in our economic ills.
I always love Ian Gillespie’s columns……but he not only outdid himself today (12/29), he hit the proverbial nail right on the head! This is what he said about “2011′s Most Irrational Idea”:
Most irrational idea:
Despite decades of research and the endorsement of more than 90 national and international health organizations, the evangelical-like Fluoride Action Network — which routinely cherry-picks statistics, cites dubious studies and makes deceptive straw-man arguments — lobbied in February for the removal of fluoride from London’s drinking water.
Well said Ian!
We have fluoridated to our drinking water.
We have added iodine to our salt.
We have added Synthetic vitamic A (palmitic acid) to our milk.
We have reptile grade vitamin d2 and lab synthesized vitamin d3 added to milk products and soy products.
We have vitamin c added to juices, vitamin c in food naturally is 1000 times better because it can work with other chemicals like bioflavonoids.
The agencies that force these products for the good of the undereducated should look for new jobs OR educate people on nutrition from real food sources… WILD seafood, organics and NON-gmo.
Why is there no mention or update on mouse pig (enviropig) in the news? Why don’t they label food gmo, will it scare people away? I doubt it. It’s all about money and making money and more money until…
Speaking of wasting money…Consider that we are paying $133,000 per year to fluoridate London’s water when only approximately 1% of that is consumed. That means about $131670 is wasted for fluoridating the rest of our environment. How about they spend the $1330 to fluoridate the water that is consumed and let those that want it, get it elsewhere – I don’t think there would be too many takers…as they can get their fluoride through toothpaste. You can use the rest of the money to by toothpaste and toothbrushes for the poor who can’t afford to do that. The rest of us prefer our water “poison free”. As for the comment: “Journalists in this newsroom work harder & show more commitment to readers now than at any other time in this newspaper’s history.” I believe some of you may work hard. However, showing commitment to readers requires a little bit of investigation before reporting on something that you have admitted you know nothing about. All you’ve done is wasted my time.
For instance why was Iodine introduced into table salt by governments?
What was the historical population health problem it addresses ? What has been the result of population-wide
use. It combatted Goiter as we recall it – never hear of it today.
This staples manipulation is different from just corporations adding substances and promoting them – a business decision based on profit, not public health issues. With these one has choice of product.
Another tempest in the teapot. Fluoride is not a new drug or chemical and has been around for a long time. If this were an
experimental drug, I would be more concerned. My daughters are in their forties and neither of them have any cavities. Their dental health is excellent and they are healthy. I prefer my information to come from experts not politicians or other people with potential conflict of interest.
Pretty pathetic to read minimally qualified comments from minimally educated commentators on topics of complicated science.
Sure, let’s all play scientists for a day and revel in our scientific ignorance pretending that in our limited understanding of scientific fact we deserve to make pronouncements.