City council decides to move up public vote on Portland fluoride
PORTLAND, Ore. – Portlanders will have a chance to vote on putting fluoride in the city’s water supply in 2013, a year earlier than originally planned.
The Portland City Council on Thursday evening voted to move up the public vote about fluoridating the water supply.
In September, the council unanimously approved fluoridating the water, despite objections about a lack of public debate. In response, opponents gathered more than 30,000 signatures and managed to refer the issue to voters.
The vote was originally scheduled for May of 2014, which was the next scheduled regular election. Thursday’s 3-1 vote will create a special election in May of 2013 to consider the issue.
Outgoing Mayor Sam Adams, as well as Commissioners Randy Leonard and Nick Fish voted to move up the public vote. Commissioner Amanda Fritz voted against it and Commissioner Dan Saltzman was not present.
The council vote came after nearly four hours of public testimony from dozens of people.
Opponents of moving up the vote called for an independent, scientific review of the effects of fluoride and also called it corrupt to change the way the system normally works.
But those in favor of an earlier vote said there have already been more than a dozen scientific reviews with clear evidence and the issue should be quickly settled.
A recent poll showed voters almost evenly split on the issue.
Fish, who co-sponsored the plan, has said more than 200 million Americans drink water with added fluoride, and it doesn't appear to have caused great harm.
Most mainstream health organizations, such as the American Medical Association and American Dental Association, endorse it as safe.
In September, police had to remove unruly protesters for yelling, swearing, hissing and disrupting a vote by the Portland City Council, which unanimously approved adding fluoride to the city's drinking water.
City councilors argued it's Portland's responsibility to protect childrens' health. Medical experts say it's a safe and effective way to keep teeth healthy.
"Reasonable people can disagree, but the science is on the side of fluoridation," Mayor Sam Adams previously said.
But opponents dispute whether fluoride is safe and said adding the mineral to drinking water violates a person's right to consent to medication.
KATU News reporter Erica Nochlin contributed to this report
OK, to all the idiots who voted this poison to be put into Portland's water this information is for you, I hope you're all happy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
Â
If you vote for this poison then you have no regard for peoples health.
I guess Randy Lenoard is probably in debt and needs some money from those pushing this poison on Portland, Adams is gone now we need to rid the city of the rest of that gang.Â
So glad I've moved out of the area that is going to get flooded with this toxic by-product.Â
I bet these hypocrites don't mind salt on their foods, the iodine is artificially added for public safety, just like flouide for the water
 @archon312 You have no idea what you're talking about. Just trying to spout off and sound remotely intelligent? You've failed big time.
 @archon312 Its call Kosher Salt look it up you can buy it anywhere. I have a choice to buy salt without iodine. Don't put poison in my water and tell me its good for me! If this passes which it won't I will have to pay to buy water that has no fluoride in it.Â
Let's see, Portland votes to put fluoride in their water.  Water with fluoride from dishwashing, laundry, bathing, etc. goes into the waste system. Fluoridated waste water is treated, then fluoridated water is released back into rivers and streams from treatment plants. And, fish will have better teeth.
There is a fundamental/fatal flaw in the rationale to dump fluoride in the water supply:
Â
The assumption of how the integrity of one's enamel takes precedence over long-term damage to soft tissue. Â
Â
This is the premise used to justify mass medication of the population in a one-dose-fits-all scenario. Another example of such absurdity:
Â
Why not put tub and sink cleaner in the water for people to ingest? Â We can set up an industry-funded nonprofit called, "Citizens for the Preservation of Elderly Elbows".
Â
Show the line of bandaged elderly anxiously waiting to testify on behalf of a minimal allowable part per million of scrubbing bubbles in Portland's water reservoirs. Â Â
Â
"We can only scrub for so long" states the neatly stenciled hand-held sign (photo courtesy of the Oregonian). Â Â
Â
You can proudly declare that it's "for the children" and refer to that front page Oregonian feature of the child that slipped on soap scum in the bathroom. Â Bring in the experts and have them testify about how conspiracy theorists have it all wrong when they complain about having allowable levels of bathroom cleaner in their drinking water.
Â
Sound familiar?
My biggest problems with fluoride are:
Â
#1 Portland Oregon has some of the best quality water in the nation, why does the city council want to change that?
#2Â Â 5 million to set up and how many million a year for upkeep?
#3Â Â Treating all the water for the .1 percent that consumed orally... Waste of money
#4Â Â Fluoride is not removed with Pur or Brita water filters, only though reverse osmosis can fluoride be removed
#5  Since I drink a lot of water my exposure is increased. You can't boil the water to remove fluoride, it only increases your exposure
#6  This will hurt the any local company i.e organic beer, organic bread or any company that is on our water supply. It will cost them money to have the fluoride removed and its not cheap.
#7Â Â This isn't naturally occurring fluoride, its a TOXIC WASTE product from China. There is no dispute that these compounds are recovered waste products from phosphate ore mining operations, and are contaminated with heavy metals and carcinogens, including lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury.
Â
The FDA is the only agency in the country vested with authority to evaluate safety or efficacy of drugs. Claims of safety and efficacy of fluoride ingestion by any other entity -  the Surgeon General, the CDC, the American Dental Association  - are not proof of safety or efficacy because these entities have no legal authority to make any such claim.
Â
If we really want to help the poor kids put them on a program that would give them free dentist visits,  tooth brushes, tooth paste and floss. The cost would be WAY LESS !! Â
Â
For the people who want to learn about the harm of fluoride please click on this link: http://www.safewateroregon.org/fluoridation.html
 @CorporateCowMoo The FDA is 100% corrupt and bought off a long time ago by big pharma. They will do whatever their corporate masters tell them to.
Fluoridationâs role in the decline of tooth decay is in serious doubt. The largest survey ever conducted in the US (over 39,000 children from 84 communities) by the National Institute of Dental Research showed little difference in tooth decay among children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities (Hileman 1989). According to NIDR researchers, the study found an average difference of only 0.6 DMFS (Decayed, Missing, and Filled Surfaces) in the permanent teeth of children aged 5-17 residing their entire lives in either fluoridated or unfluoridated areas (Brunelle & Carlos, 1990). This difference is less than one tooth surface, and less than 1% of the 100+ tooth surfaces available in a childâs mouth. Large surveys from three Australian states have found even less of a benefit, with decay reductions ranging from 0 to 0.3 of one permanent tooth surface (Spencer 1996; Armfield & Spencer 2004). None of these studies have allowed for the possible delayed eruption of the teeth that may be caused by exposure to fluoride, for which there is some evidence (Komarek 2005). A one-year delay in eruption of the permanent teeth would eliminate the very small benefit recorded in these modern studies.
Â
NIH-funded study on individual fluoride ingestion and tooth decay found no significant correlation. A multi-million dollar, U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded study found no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride intake among children. (Warren 2009) This is the first time tooth decay has been investigated as a function of individual exposure (as opposed to mere residence in a fluoridated community).
For all of the nutjobs and dingbats that want to float around this 'poison' rhetoric and reference a couple of out-dated reports, maybe the most recent one will help..
Â
http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safety/nas.htm
The 2007 NRC Report on Earth Materials and Health: Research Priorities for Earth Sciences and Public Health*
In this report, the NRC considered research issues related to the medical geology field on connections between earth science and public health, addressing both positive and negative societal impacts. This report identified fluoride as a mineral that can positively influence human health, and although earlier NRC reports were not conclusive in their opinions, this report concluded that fluoride was considered to be an element essential for human life based on its role in cellular functions involving metabolic or biochemical processes. The report further stated that fluoride in drinking water has two beneficial effects: preventing tooth decay (dental caries) and contributing to bone mineralization and bone matrix integrity.
@JGalt Try Harvard and NIH peer reviewed study from 2013. Fluoride lowers IQ. You can drill it from links provided. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/fluoride_b_2479833.html
 @JGalt Tell me where they get the fluoride from, then tell me its not poison.Â
Since when have they been concerned about saving money?
In case they are able to send poison to us, will any kind of
water filter available remove this sewage from my H2O?
@Mipsfer Â
Unfortunately, no. The fluoride molecule is smaller than the H2O molecule, so you would have to filter the water out. RO filters help , as fluoride clings to any other molecule going, so RO filters will take out the calcium, etc with some fluoride attached, but not all. Distillation is the only method I have heard of that works, seemingly.Â
Hurry fluoridate the water before the mind controlled slaves have a chance to wake up. Note how everyone on city council is for it. Obvious sign that they receive kickbacks to get this introduced into the water. Then with the proceeds they buy fancy water filters for their families. No different than the parking meter scandal.Â
Â
âThe prevalence of dental caries in a population is not inversely related to the concentration of fluoride in enamel, and a higher concentration of enamel fluoride is not necessarily more efficacious in preventing dental caries.âSOURCE: CDC (2001). Recommendations for using fluoride to prevent and control dental caries in the United States. Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Review 50(RR14):1-42.
Since we like referencing the CDC and NRC.. how about something more up to date?
Â
The 2007 NRC Report on Earth Materials and Health: Research Priorities for Earth Sciences and Public Health*
In this report, the NRC considered research issues related to the medical geology field on connections between earth science and public health, addressing both positive and negative societal impacts. This report identified fluoride as a mineral that can positively influence human health, and although earlier NRC reports were not conclusive in their opinions, this report concluded that fluoride was considered to be an element essential for human life based on its role in cellular functions involving metabolic or biochemical processes. The report further stated that fluoride in drinking water has two beneficial effects: preventing tooth decay (dental caries) and contributing to bone mineralization and bone matrix integrity.
The Portland City Councils decision could be the best action in history to prove that fluoridation is illegal. A legal challange is in order. NO Federal agency currently accepts responsibility for fluoridation. It appears that any water authority can cease water fluoridation, or refuse to impliment fluoridation at any time they choose. By choosing to NOT BREAK THE LAW. It is not a criminal act to stop fluoridating. Who will come to the rescue? EPA? No, they are in charge of removing contaminants. FDA? No. They donât have jurisdiction of community water fluoridation, only bottled water. The EPA set up or reorganized a surrogate organization to do what it could not do. It reorganized the National Sanitation Foundation into a regulatory agency which would certify and authorize drinking water fluoridation and the artificial fluorides used to fluoridate. NSF Standard 60 and the NSF web site state repeatedly that toxicological and health studies are required. However, NSF representatives have admitted that NSF does not obtain toxicological studies on fluoridation materials from the fertilizer company suppliers nor does it do its own toxicological studies on fluoridation materials. NSF does not even follow its own rules. Instead of setting a.4 ppm MAL, maximum allowable level, which would be one-tenth of the EPA 4.0 ppm MCL, NSF sets a 1.2 ppm MAL. The exact wording can be found at: http://www.nsf.org/business/water_distribution/pdf/NSF_Fact_Sheet.pdf . For contaminants regulated by the U.S. EPA, this SPAC has a default level not to exceed ten-percent of the regulatory level to provide protection for the consumer in the unlikely event of multiple sources of the contaminant, unless a lower or higher number of sources can be specifically identified. The NSF Standard 60 single product allowable concentration (SPAC) for fluoride ion in drinking water from NSF Certified treatment products is 1.2 mg/L, or less than one-third of the EPAâs MCL. The conclusion then is that âthe buck stopsâ at the water district office. It is the municipalities which assume the liability of requiring fluoridation. The water district makes its decision based on the false assurances of a sham regulatory agency that fluoridation materials are safe. law requires that they rely on this sham regulatory agency; it does not require that the water district make any further inquiry.
I miss having fluoride in my water. It's honesty the only things these clowns haves done that I don't disagree with.
The headless "advocate" photo just screams BS propaganda to me. Here's my opinion -- Randy Leonard stands to gain something (cash? stocks? favors?) from whomever is going to supply the poisonous fluoride to our water supply. He couldn't pull it off before his pathetic term ended (yeah, "retired" like Sam Adams, and will forever be the KING of H2O corruption and milking the city of Portland for every drop of illegal water funding he can lap) so now he's using the last bit of his power to try to force the vote to happen in May, so the industrial waste providers -- who stand to profit from this mess and have promised to line his pockets -- might have the best chance possible of pumping their sludge into our water supply under the guise of helping poor kids have healthier teeth. Right, because providing them with TOOTHPASTE would be somehow less effective, I mean less lucrative. Yes, it would definitely be less lucrative. Follow the money trail, people. Randy's legacy is and will always be dirty water if the idiots of Portland will just pull their heads out of the sand and check his stock portfolio and/or bank account.
Â
Of course this is all just a guess on my part and I'm just imagining probabilities. I mean possibilities. None of this is actually a likely scenario. Fiction. Just like fluoridation. I mean, all is well. Pay no attention to the ugly little man in your faucet.
 @badcat ~  Good post, badcat..!   You know, the more I hear and read about this Portland fluoride issue, the more I think there's more to this than just a bunch of local politicians wanting to "make kids' teeth healthy"..  They're pushing w-a-y too hard on this... WHY???  There are too many other options that people can use to get fluoride, if they want it, that don't involve forcing it on people who do NOT want it.  As for the $5 million projected expenditure, aren't there things that Portland needs that are more critical???  Â
Call me cynical and suspicious, but historically, anytime politicians get so obsessed about something like this, there's something going on behind the scenes that they're not telling us about...
As you said... "follow the money trail, people"...Â
Gosh, reminds me of, of what's-his-name that skirts the Constitution on a regular basis. What is sad that Randy Leonard was a failure in all aspects of his life that he has to make one last try to salvage his miserable life and will drive by the fire station with his name every day in order to feel good about himself. Let the citizens decide this, you LOP!!
 @boned ~  I seem to recall reading that Randy Leonard was in a big hurry to retire last year...don't remember why, but there was something going on, and he was quitting or something... What happened to that idea..?   (Or did Sam talk him into staying on...?)
This comment has been deleted
 @boned ~  Thank you..!  That was the part I couldn't recall... about his daughter's suicide...Â
Y'know, folks, when you consider all the various chemicals that are in our water, food (preservatives, etc), some of the stuff that's fed to animals that will be slaughtered for human consumption... Â pesticides that are sprayed on veggies and fruit... plus all these weird scrip meds that Big Pharma is shoving down our throats as fast as they can...plus, of course, street drugs for those who use them... Â Who the he11 knows for sure how all this stuff might be reacting in combinations... or how long it takes to do it... people react differently to different things...
I can't help but think that we may be seeing some results of ingesting all this cr*p that isn't really good for us...that we were never meant to consume... and maybe some of the mental health issues we're seeing more and more of might just be related to that... Â Â
I'm not being paranoid; just wondering if there might be a correlation here...
 @margay1 I love your opines, and always have if you are the person I believe you to be after looking at your style of writing, but I could be wrong as my Burmese cat is attacking me!!!
 @boned ~  Well, I really enjoy your posts, too, boned...  a lot of common sense there, and that's becoming a rarity in our country these days..!  Â
You have a Burmese cat??? Â Lucky you; they're sooo beautiful..! Â I'm a cat-lover, too...they are all the things that humans should be, but aren't and probably never will be... Â :-)
 @margay1 I like your style margay. You are seeing in 4D now and the blinders are off.
 @B00gs ~  Well, thank you, BOOgs..!   :-)
 @margay1 not that they were on hehe ;)
Â
Its been studied that fluoride creates little if any benefits to preventing tooth decay. Just smoke a mirrors. Funny how CDC considers it a poison. Â Â http://www.drbriffa.com/2001/09/28/is-fluoride-really-effective-in-preventing-tooth-decay-or-could-it-be-doing-us-more-harm-than-good/
2001? Yawn.
Â
The 2007 NRC Report on Earth Materials and Health: Research Priorities for Earth Sciences and Public Health*
In this report, the NRC considered research issues related to the medical geology field on connections between earth science and public health, addressing both positive and negative societal impacts. This report identified fluoride as a mineral that can positively influence human health, and although earlier NRC reports were not conclusive in their opinions, this report concluded that fluoride was considered to be an element essential for human life based on its role in cellular functions involving metabolic or biochemical processes. The report further stated that fluoride in drinking water has two beneficial effects: preventing tooth decay (dental caries) and contributing to bone mineralization and bone matrix integrity.
@JGalt You already posted this above. I countered with the Harvard/NIH peer reviewed 2013 study demonstrating that fluoride reduces IQ. Am I the only one catching the irony here? That's a source trump. Further, you're presenting a narrow regurgitation of your study out of context while entirely neglecting the disturbing fluorosis data. Over. Next.
"Most mainstream health organizations, such as the American Medical Association and American Dental Association, endorse it as safe." Â (from the story)
Â
Good for the AMA and the ADA..! Â Â I'm happy for them... Â but their opinion doesn't mean that people shouldn't have the right to decide for themselves whether or not they want fluoride added to their water. Â Â
We already have many things that are decided for us by the government... Why add something else that is unnecessary..? Â People who want it can get added fluoride easily in a number of different ways; let people decide for THEMSELVES..!
And I should have the right to decide if people get to sit on their butts and get freebies while I have to work. Guess life just isn't fair, eh? As long as I'm forced to pay for all of the idiots up here, they're going to be forced to take their medicine - in this case, fluoride for their teeth.
 @JGalt ~ That sounds more like petty revenge than rational thought, JGalt...
Last chance for Adams and Leonard to screw Portland, but Fish... you can bet voters won't forget.
I am so glad I don't live in Portland! What is wrong with the people there that they keep electing these corrupt politicians who refuse to listen to the people? Is Portland trying to be the new Chicago? News flash - Chicago sucks! It's a violent, dirty and broke city run by thugs.
 @RabidAlley Most politicians are paid by the fertilizer companies to offload their waste into the drinking water. In fact 90% of it comes from china who, even themselves, wont put it in their own water supply. They poison our supply up here in Longview and Im pretty fezzed up about it. I will be givingo ur idiot council members a earfull on their next meeting. Blows my minds how little people know about flourosilicacid and are "OK" with drinking it.Good luck portlanders. San Diego actually had a law to keep flourosilicacid out of the water voted by the people yet the city was forced by the state to add it or pay hefty fines.
If people want fluoride in their water they can add it themselves... don't burden the rest of us and taint our drinking water!
Read the harvard medical studies say about flouridated drinking water and what it does to your body. Cancer,adhd and many other things including lowering a persons IQ. I cant believe people listen to 1% of the crap these politicians spew. Wake up people and take your lives back. BTW flourisilicacid is a hazardous waste. Sheeple will never learn. If you have 30 min I strongly urge you to watch this video and show anyone else you can. Its called "The Culling, Our Water"Â http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx0ROInM3C4
Bunch of BS.....
Â
http://blog.oregonlive.com/portlandcityhall/2012/10/portland_city_council_calendar.html
Â
Stupid to put something that is available over the counter into the water and force it on everyone! Â One size does not fit all!!!!
Eh, why bother even allowing portlanders to vote. The government will just ignore the outcome if it doesn't go their way.
wow cannot believe city hall over rides the voters of Portland again. This must not stand. Nick fish needs to be recalled. People get informed about how bad fluoride is for your body. Fluoride lobbyists want it pushed forward so you do not find out.....Please stay informed do not let them poison your kids with this...
@poodlem What are you gonna do now? Start a petition to vote on the delay on the delay of the vote?