Fluoride resolution rejected

By Kevin O ’Brien

In the midst of a national effort to remove fluoride from drinking water, members of Marathon County’s Health and Human Services Committee have narrowly rejected a resolution that would have urged local municipalities to significantly reduce the chemical below levels that are generally considered beneficial to dental health.

At its latest meeting on April 2, the committee voted 3-4 against a resolution introduced by supervisor Stacey Morache that would have recommended a fluoride level of. 15 mg/L or below for all municipal water systems in the county, citing concerns about the possibility of brain damage to children and a variety of other health problems.

The Environmental Protection Agency currently recommends a fluoride concentration of .7 mg/L in drinking water to help prevent cavities and tooth decay but last September, U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen ordered the EPA to further review the safety of the substance in light of recent studies showing potential hazards.

Judge Chen’s decision said the court “does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health,” but it also said there are legitimate concerns about the impact on cognitive development.

“Given the seriousness of reduced IQ, and the ample support in the record that the United States population is at risk of experiencing IQ decrements of over four IQ points, the severity of the hazard at issue weights in favor of finding the risk at issue unreasonable,” he wrote.

Morache’s resolution cites Judge Chen’s ruling, along with multiple studies linking fluoride to numerous health issues, as a reason for the county to recommend drastically reducing levels in local water supplies.

See FLUORIDE/ Page 5 Fluoride

Continued from page 1

Lowering fluoride concentrations from .7 to .15 mg/L would represent a nearly fivefold reduction.

The American Dental Association and other public health groups continue to recommend a fluoride concentration of at least .7 mg/L in drinking water, and the EPA still allows levels to be as high as 4.0 mg/L. Morache’s resolution, however, says that concentrations as low as 1.5 mg/L can have detrimental effects on children’s IQs, and the EPA normally recommends lowering consumption limits by a factor of 10, which results in the suggestion of no more than. 15 mg/L.

Committee members spent nearly an hour debating the merits of Morache’s resolution, and at one point, supeivisor Chantelle Foote made a motion to amend the proposal to recommend no fluoridation of water at all. With fluoride now available in toothpaste, mouthwash and other supplements, she wondered why local utilities are still adding it.

“I don’t understand why we’re adding this when anyone can add it themselves at home if they need to, or with a medical advisor saying they need it,” she said.

Foote’s motion to amend the resolution failed on a 3-4 vote, with supervisors Jennifer Aarrestad and Tony Covelli voting for it, and supervisors Matt Bootz, Bill Conway, Randy Radtke and Yee Leng Xiong voting no. The vote on the original amendment broke down along the same lines.

The debate

Supervisor Aarrestad introduced the resolution to the rest of the committee on behalf of Morache, who is not on the committee and was not present at the April 2 meeting.

Opposition to water fluoridation has been around for a long time, Aarrestad said, reading from testimony her grandfather gave to the Minneapolis City Council back in 1953.

“Under fluoridation, if you want a glass of pure water, you can’t get it,” she read. “You’ve got to accept the sodium chloride cocktail in its place or go thirsty.”

Aarrestad emphasized her concern with allowing the government to mandate chemical addition to water even when there are questions as to the health impacts. She referenced the nearly 60 pages of study results and article links included in the committee’s agenda packet dealing with the potential risks of fluoride consumption.

A nationwide rethinking of water fluoridation has started to result in action. Aarrestad noted that Utah Gov. Spencer Cox recently signed a bill into law that prohibits adding fluoride to water across that state. “He stated: ‘It’s got to be a really high bar for me if we are going to require people to be medicated by their government,’” she said.

Several municipalities, such as Wausau, Weston, Edgar, Athens, and Kronenwetter, all fluoridate their water, while others, such as Stratford, Mosinee, Hatley and Schofield do not. Statewide, she said a majority of municipal water systems do not add fluoride to their water.

Aarrestad also questioned what messaging was being put out by the county’s Nurse-Family Partnership program, which provides in-home visits from nurses for new and expecting mothers.

“Are we talking to our mothers about fluoridated water, and the effects on children and pregnancy?” she wondered.

The crux of the argument is that any benefits from fluoridating water are far outweighed by the risks of neurological impairment, and that topical application of fluoride with toothpaste or mouthwash is more preferable than ingestion.

Supervisor Covelli said he supported the resolution after researching the issue of fluoride safety for the past 10 years.

“I was never a fan of adding any chemicals or toxic substances to our water supply,” he said. “I do believe in the rights and the health care freedoms of citizens to be able to make that choice if they want to add it to their water supply.”

Those who opposed the resolution said they had concerns about telling local municipalities what to do with their own water treatment.

Supervisor Conway said he spoke to his longtime dentist, who told him that fluoride is “safe and effective” and “there’s no reason not to have it” in drinking water. Even if others disagree, Conway said he doesn’t believe it’s the county’s place to get involved in local decision-making.

“I don’t think this is our particular fish to fry,” he said.

When supervisor Radtke asked for the opinion of the Health Department, county administrator Lance Leonhard said neither he nor the interim public health officer in the room was qualified to address the issue.

“If there is a desire for more information, we will do our best to bring you an expert,” he told committee members. “I’m highly uncomfortable wading in an area where quite honestly I don’t have that expertise.”

Covelli reiterated his belief that fluoride is a toxic substance that should not be added to the water supply, but he also noted that the resolution was a recommendation to local municipalities, not a mandate.

“We’re not saying that they have to put fluoride in water or not put fluoride in water,” he said.

Chairman Bootz acknowledged that he would not want fluoride in his own water in part because he already lives in a rural township without fluoridation - but he also doesn’t want the county telling municipalities what is best for them.

“I don’t like trying to tramp a municipality as a county. 1 don’t like it when the state tramps us when they think they know what we should be doing,” he said. “That’s how I stand on this.”