Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Fluoride News - Michigan, New Mexico, California, Kansas

Anti-fluoridation group seeks (tv) debate opponent
By Annie Calovich
The Wichita Eagle
Published Monday, Sep. 17, 2012
Read more here:

An anti-fluoridation group said Monday that it’s planning to be part of a televised debate about fluoride on public television in October and is looking for two people to debate on the pro-fluoridation side.

The group, Pure Water for Wichita, challenged the pro-fluoridation group Wichitans for Healthy Teeth to a televised debate in August. Don Landis, speaking for Pure Water for Wichita, said Monday that the groups had been exchanging e-mails, but Wichitans for Healthy Teeth did not firm up the details in a timely enough manner. He then asked for people from the community to apply to be part of the debate instead.

Wichitans for Healthy Teeth issued a statement in response saying that, in its last e-mail with Pure Water, “we were finalizing negotiations.

“It is disingenuous to claim that we are avoiding a debate when in fact, we began communicating about a public discussion with Pure Water for Wichita on August 23 and have responded multiple times to a representative of the group,” the statement said. “Several days have gone by without a reply from them.”

Michele Gors, president and CEO of KPTS, Ch. 8, said details will have to be completed in the next couple of weeks for the debate to be televised as scheduled from 8 to 9 p.m. Oct. 18.

The statement from Wichitans for Healthy Teeth said that it had accepted an invitation for a public forum to be moderated by the League of Women Voters on Oct. 23. Landis said his group hadn’t heard about it but would attend if asked.

Landis asked Wichita residents interested in debating on the pro-fluoridation side on KPTS to send an e-mail to by 5 p.m. Friday with a brief description of why they should be considered. He said that two people would be selected by a disinterested third party to debate two people who oppose fluoridation. He said he would reveal the identities of the two fluoridation opponents later.
Gors said she hoped that there would be a debate on what seems to be a complicated issue.
“I think it would be good for the community to hear both sides and get some of their questions answered,” she said.

Reach Annie Calovich at 316-268-6596 or

Opinion: Fluoride Propaganda by First Five of Sacramento

by Brian Lambert, published on September 18, 2012
Disclosure: Brian Lambert is a member of Fluoride Free Sacramento
Summary:  This article takes the "Sacramento Bee" to task on publishing DIS-information about fluoride in a prior article. Be sure to scroll down to read the comments section -- several have really good, detailed information not usually seen in print against fluoride.  Examples:  the author, Brian Lambert, states that "The issue for promoters is the liability" -- another commenter replies to being "tin foil hat" with this quote > "Observe which side resorts to the most viciferous name calling and you are likely to have identified the side with the weaker argument and they know it."Charles R. Anderson  -- and another commenter by the name of  Dr. R. Sauerheber gives many facts, one of which is the salmon collapse in Sacrament waters due to fluoride, same as the salmon collapse that happened in the Oregon waters back in the 1970's, BUT the salmon came back once fluoride was removed, based on researchers at the University of Oregon's studies!

FYI:  Sante Fe, New Mexico - City Council has decided NOT to let the public vote on fluoride, with the City Council making the final decision soon.

Fluoridation issue will be back in front of council soon

By Rick Charmoli, September 19, 2012

...The council discussed the opportunity Monday to apply for a grant from the Michigan Department of Community Health. The purpose of the grant is to promote community water fluoridation, and through funds from the grant, communities may purchase the equipment for the program...

Council member Shari Spoelman said she knew it was a difficult decision but believed the council didn't have enough time to make it before the grant process deadlines. She also felt it was compelling that many cities in the nation as well as countries around the world don't fluoridate their water supplies, but she said she believed more research needed to be done. 

In order to be eligible for the grant, the council needs to present a vote in favor of fluoridation. This support of fluoridation must be attached to the application when it is submitted by Feb. 8. Prior to that, the city must submit a letter of intent by Jan. 31. 

Council member Tiyi Schippers said during the council discussion that while there is something to be said about the effectiveness of fluoridated water supplies on dental health, new research over the last 10 to 15 years offered interesting points of why not to fluoridate water supplies. 

While the council took no action on Monday, the issue will be back in front of them in the near future. Peccia said he and other staff will work at gathering data on the issue as well as trying to locate experts in favor of and opposed to fluoridation. Once that is done, a public hearing will be sceduled, probably sometime next month or in November.

No comments:

Post a Comment