To The Ashland City CouncilNovember 21 2006

Good evening My name is Amy Cuddy and I live at 194 Logan Drive in Ashland

I amhere tonight to ask that you postpone your decision on banning fluoride in the citywater and toask that you research this issue more fully before voting

In my remarks I want tomake four points1 We have aproblem in our community2 There is a safe and effective solution to the problem asolution which the

ordinance before you pre empts3 This is not ahealth issue it is however aclass issue4 Experts on this subject are available and should be consulted before a significant

policy decision is made

Point 1 We have aproblem in our community

Poor dental health is the most prevalent public health problem affecting children inJackson County We have pre schoolers in our community who need root canals andelementary students with decay in over90 oftheir teeth These are children whocannot pay attention in school due to tooth pain and who in some cases cannot eat wellenough to thrive

And their prognosis is not good Dental problems can plague aperson for a lifetimedamaging his orher overall health limiting his or her chances of employment andencouraging self medicationsubstance abuse to dull the pain

It is well known in the field that good oral health is built on a 3 legged stool ofprevention brushing flossing and so on access to dental care and fluoridation In our

community we have no fluoridation and limited access to care leaving one leg to try tohold up the stool And it isn tworking as local healthcare providers especially thosewho serve the needy can attest to

Point 2 There is asafe and effective solution to the problem a solutionwhich theordinance before you pre empts

The American Dental Association ADA has supported the use of fluoridation for more

than 55 years Their web site lists study after study supporting its use some studieswhich demonstrate its clear health benefits and other studies which dispel safetyconcerns

And Iquote from the ADA web site

Fluoridation ofcommunity water supplies is safe This has been the American DentalAssociation s ADA policy since 1950 TheADA spolicies regarding community water

fluoridation are based on the overwhelming weight of credible scientific evidence Thisbody ofknowledge is based on the efforts ofnationally recognizedscientists who haveconducted research using the scientific method have drawn appropriate balancedconclusions based on their research findings and have published their results in refereedpeer reviewed professional journals that are widely held or circulated such as TheJournal ofthe American MedicalAssociation and the American Journal ofPublicHealth Studies showing the safety of waterfluoridation have been confirmed byindependent scientific studies

Throughout more than 55 years of research andpractical experience the overwhelmingweight ofcredible scientific evidence has consistently indicated thatfluoridation ofcommunity water supplies is safe Thepossibility ofany adverse health effectsfromcontinuous low level consumption offluoride has been and continues to be extensivelystudied Of the hundreds ofcredible scientific studies onfluoridation none has shownhealth problems associated with the consumption ofoptimallyfluoridated water

End quote

So clear is the link however between fluoride and reduced dental disease that on

October 14th ofthis year the Food and Drug Administration FDA issued adecision

allowing bottlers to claim that their fluoridated bottled water may reduce the risk ofcavities and tooth decay In issuing this ruling the FDA cited the fmdings ofthe SurgeonGeneral the Centers for Disease Control and others You ve probably seenvitaminwaters well coming soon toagrocery store near youwill be fluoridated waters Inaddition public health departments in some states have begun issuing or are consideringissuing fluoridated bottles ofwater to new mothers to mix with baby formula

Point 3 This is not ahealth issue it is however aclass issue

Please be aware that in AsWand the issue offluoridation is at least in part an economicclass issue Those who can afford it buy prescription fluoride drops for their infants andlater prescription vitamins that contain fluoride for their children to ingest on the adviceoftheir pediatricians they buy fluoride rinses for their children to swish with every dayon the advice oftheir dentists and orthodontists and they pay for topical fluoride

applications at the dentist In other words the privileged still get fluoride if they chooseIt is the most vulnerable children who do not

And sadly they may never get fluoride But if you pass this ordinance they certainly willnot

Studies show that for every 1 invested in fluoridation future dental care costs are

reduced by 38 That s in part why I keep buying those fluoridated vitamins while thosewho cannot afford the vitamins probably can tafford the subsequent dental work

You may have seen the article in The Mail Tribune acouple ofdays ago about the

pediatric dentist from Southern Oregon who has been doing work in impoverishedcommunities in Vietnam According to the article his next goal is to bring fluoridationto the water there that is to provide an important health benefit to people who need it butare simply too poor topay for it How ironic As I said it s aclass issue

Point 4 Experts on this subiect are available and should be consulted before a

significant policy decision is made

Clearly I amacitizen who believes in the benefits offluoride I understand that you haveheard from other concerned citizens who do not Good people can disagree even aboutwhat the science says So what I am asking is that you not take my word for it or anyother citizen s word

Rather that you delay this decision and in the meantime ask to hear more much more

from some experts both locally and nationally such as the ADA the Surgeon Generalour county health director Hank Collins the dental program manager at La Clinica delValle the director ofthe Children s Dental Clinic which uses volunteer dentists to

provide free dental care to needy children in the Rogue Valley and so on

Should you wish I would be happy to help with referrals andor in other ways As a startI have attached to my printed remarks a three page list ofnational and international

organizations that recognize the public health benefits ofcommunity water fluoridationThese organizations range from the March of Dimes to the Alzheimer s Association andfrom the National Head Start Association to the American Cancer Society I hope thiswill be ahelpful reference for you

Thank you for your consideration this evening

National and International Organizations That Recognize the PublicHealth Benefits of Community Water Fluoridation for Preventing DentalDecay

Academy ofDentistry International

Academy of General DentistryAcademy for Sports DentistryAlzheimer s AssociationAmerica s Health Insurance PlansAmerican Academy ofFamily PhysiciansAmerican Academy ofNurse PractitionersAmericanAcademy ofOral and Maxillofacial PathologyAmerican Academy ofOrthopaedic SurgeonsAmerican Academy ofPediatricsAmerican Academy ofPediatric DentistryAmerican Academy ofPeriodontologyAmerican Academy ofPhysician AssistantsAmerican Association for Community Dental ProgramsAmerican Association for Dental ResearchAmerican Association for Health EducationAmerican Association for the Advancement of ScienceAmerican Association ofEndodontistsAmerican Association of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeonsAmerican Association of OrthodontistsAmerican Association ofPublic Health DentistryAmerican Association of Women Dentists

American Cancer SocietyAmerican College ofDentistsAmerican College ofPhysicians American SocietyofInternal Medicine

American College ofPreventive MedicineAmerican College ofProsthodontists

American Council on Science and HealthAmerican Dental Assistants AssociationAmerican Dental AssociationAmerican Dental Education AssociationAmerican Dental Hygienists AssociationAmerican Dietetic Association

American Federation ofLabor and CongressofIndustrial OrganizationsAmerican Hospital AssociationAmerican Legislative Exchange Council

American Medical Association

American Nurses AssociationAmerican Osteopathic AssociationAmerican Pharmacists Association

American Public Health AssociationAmerican School Health AssociationAmerican Society for Clinical NutritionAmerican Society for Nutritional SciencesAmerican Student Dental Association

American Veterinary Medical AssociationAmerican Water Works AssociationAssociation for Academic Health CentersAssociation of American Medical CollegesAssociation ofClinicians for the UnderservedAssociation of Maternal and Child Health ProgramsAssociation ofState and Territorial Dental DirectorsAssociation of State and Territorial Health OfficialsAssociation of State and Territorial Public HealthNutrition Directors

British Fluoridation SocietyCanadian Dental Association

Canadian Dental Hygienists Association

Canadian Medical AssociationCanadian Nurses AssociationCanadian Paediatric SocietyCanadian Public Health AssociationChild Welfare League ofAmericaChildren s Dental Health ProjectChocolate Manufacturers AssociationConsumer Federation ofAmericaCouncil of State and Territorial EpidemiologistsDelta Dental Plans AssociationFDI World Dental Federation

Federation of American HospitalsHispanic Dental AssociationIndian Dental Association U S AInstitute ofMedicineInternational Association for Dental ResearchInternational Association for OrthodonticsInternational College of DentistsMarch ofDimes Birth Defects FoundationNational Association ofCommunity Health CentersNational Association of County and City Health OfficialsNational Association of Dental AssistantsNational Association of Local Boards ofHealthNational AssociationofSocial WorkersNational Confectioners Association

National Council Against Health Fraud

National Dental Assistants Association

National Dental AssociationNational Dental Hygienists AssociationNational Down Syndrome Congress

National Down Syndrome SocietyNational Eating Disorders AssociationNational Foundation ofDentistry for the HandicappedNational Head Start AssociationNational Health Law ProgramNational Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies CoalitionNational Kidney FoundationOral Health AmericaRobert Wood Johnson Foundation

Society for Public Health Education

Society ofAmerican Indian Dentists

Special Care DentistryAcademy ofDentistry for Persons with DisabilitiesAmericanAssociation ofHospital DentistsAmerican Society for Geriatric Dentistry

The Children s Health FundThe Dental Health Foundation of CaliforniaU S Department ofDefense

U S Department ofVeterans AffairsU S Public Health Service

Health Resources and Services Administration HRSACenters for Disease Control and Prevention CDCNational Institute ofDental and Craniofacial Research NIDCR

World Federation ofOrthodontists

World Health Organization

Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute this Fluoridation Facts

Compendium in its entirety without modification To request any other

copyright permission please contact the American Dental Association at 312440 2879

a history of the mandatory fluoridation of public water systems

Whether we believe water fluoridation is good or bad comes down to what sources ofinformation we choose to believe The Center for Disease Control promotes waterfluoridation For many years the public health industry told us that lead was safe in gasolineand DOT was good for us We know today the falsity of those campaigns It is of coursewise to question authority when that authority s research is funded by industries with financialand political interests at stake

Christopher Bryson an award winning journalist and former producer at the BSC spent 10years researching the public fluoridation of water in the writing of his 2004 book TheFluoride Deception Bryson s research uncovered that the first suggestion that fluoride beadded to public water supplies was made in 1939 by a researcher Gerald Cox at the MellonInstitute in Pittsburg

Cox became interested in fluoride because of the suggestion of Francis Frary the director ofthe aluminum laboratory for the Aluminum Company of America ALCOA the largestproducer of toxic sodium fluoride waste Frary suggested that Cox look at Fluoride s dentaleffec At the time that ALCOA was being threatened by fluoride damage claims Cox was

employed by ALCOA to fluoridate lab rats and he concluded that fluoride reduced cavitiesand claimed that it should be added to the nation s water sUPPlies 1947 Oscar Ewing a

long time ALCOA lawyer was appointed head of the Federal Security Agency placing him incharge of the Public Health Service Over the next three years eighty seven new U S citiesbegan fluoridating their water

Bryson studied the files of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission andfound that in the forties fluoride was being researched by the Manhattan Project and theUniversity of Rochester as one of the important toxic components in creating the atomicbomb As a result of the enormous quantities of fluoride needed to produce the bomb thatwas dropped on Hiroshima the Manhattan Project asked the toxicology department at theUniversity of Rochester to come up with medical information that could help the governmentin lawsuits in which the United States Army and the U S government were being chargedwith fluoride pollution

According to James M Dunning Harvard School of Dental Medicine 1984 Quote fromSocial Science Medicine 1984 vol 19 page 1245 The big cities in the United Stateswere mostly fluoridated by executive action in such a way as to avoid public referenda

Bryson also found that during the 90 s a nuerotoxicologist at a Harvard affiliated researchinstitute Phyllis Mullenix had invented a new technology for studying the nuerotoxicity of

various chemicals When Mullenix was brought into the Forsythe Dental Research Institute inBoston she was asked to study the effects of fluoride Mullenix refused to waste her timebecause she thought fluoride was good for children and it had been around for many yearsAgainst her better judgment she was ordered to study the effects of fluoride Slhe found thatwhen given in very modest doses fluoride lead to lower 10 s and produced symptoms in ratsstrongly resembling attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder ADHD Just days before herresearch was accepted for publication Mullenix was fired as the head of toxicology at theForsyth Dental Center Then her application for a grant to continue her fluoride and centralnervous system research was turned down by the U S National Institute of Health NIH Thisindustry leading nuerotoxicologist has received no grants since that time to continue herresearch

Yet according to a Portland Tribune issue on March 24 2006 a panel of the WashingtonD C based National Academy of Sciences released a report finding that fluoride is less safethan previously thought and that the federal Environmental Protection Agency s safety limiton fluoride in water should be lowered They found that fluoride causes a harmful variety ofdental fluorosis They also found persuasive evidence that fluoride in water increases bonefractures as well as stiffness in the joints of the elderly and that it also may be related toAlzheimer s disease marginally reduce 10 in children and alter the endocrine and hormonallevels that control most of the functions of the human body with unknown effects The studyindicated that the chemical may even cause bone cancer

In about 60 of 2000 referenda held in the U S since 1950 fluoridation has aen voteddown Chemical Enoineerino News August 1 1988

The Fluoride Action Network has a list of roughly 150 cities that rejected public water

fluoridation since 1991 on their website with an associated story for most cities

According to Oregon representative Dennis Richardson of Central Point in 2005 the F D Ahas never tested nor approved fluoride In a written position on his website he stated Ibelieve the issue of whether or not a community should add fluoride to its own water systemis a local matter for local determination I strongly agree with this statement

Hopefully our City Council will pass an ordinance prior to the 2007 legislative session to beclear that the City opposes mandatory fluoridation of our drinking water And hClpefully withsuch an ordinance on the books Ashland could be exempted from a future mandatory waterfluoridation law This is why I support the resolution restricting the addition of substances tohe drinking water

Bryson awards Goorge Polk Award for work at Public Television s The Kwitny Report In 1998 he was part of a team that won a

National Headliner award at ABC News Productions for a History Channel documentary on the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103

Fluoride OrdinanceArt Buiiock

1 The fluoride ordinance is poorly written law that doesn t accomplish itsobjective The ordinance is basically a single sentence prohibiting any person fromadding medication to City water Council Communication Packet explains thE citycorporation wants to protect itself against state government especially the 2007legislative session from requiring it to add fluoride to Ashland s drinking waterUnfortunately fluoride can easily be interpreted as NOT a medication The law fails

to define medication which it should have done Given the lack of definition OregonSupreme Court will require the common usage definition they use Webster s

International Unabridged Dictionary This dictionary defines medication as a drug usedto treat illness

Fluoride can thus be interpreted as NOT a drug Fluoride is a mineral It s a requiredmineral You can t live without it Like iron it s a standard mineral that s consideredpart of the food supply It s a food not a drug

Fluoride is also a poison If you take too much of it it causes fluoridosis a medicalcondition Some American cities are in regions with lots of fluoride in ground waterused for drinking they have treatment plants to REMOVE fluoride from the waterbecause of its dangers

So fluoride is a mineral that can cause harm in large quantities If you go to thesupplements section of your vitamin store you won t find fluoride It s given underdoctor s prescription in either pill or liquid form

Even though its given by prescription it could easily be argued that it s still not a

drug or a medication because it doesn t treat illness It s no more a drug or medicationthan sugar or iron or Vitamin C

2 This law should not be passed to second reading until 4 things are done1 The word person should be defined And it s not even appropriate to use the

improper definition of person in tonight s other ordinance the picnics and panadesordinance since that ordinance defines a person as any person That absurddefinition is the classic example of a circular written law that definies a word in terms ofitself You have 2 ordinances tonight with the improper use of the word person Bothneed to be fixed

2 The word medication should be defined Remember the problem with fluorideis not just fluoride it s waste products in and along with the fluoride compound Youdon t get just fluoride You get fluoride as part of a compound You could have thesituation where piggy backing on the fluoride were other chemicals not consideredmedication which caused harm or did not satify the precautionary principle Youshould define the contents to include the sorts of fillers liquifiers gelsemulsifiers etc that accompany medication and aren t themselves medication

3 You should specifically add terms like minerals vitamins and healthsupplements to prevent the argument that fluoride is not a medication fromgutting the law s intended purpose

4 Council is trying to avoid the word fluoride However if you don t includethe law may be worthless in an Oregon court or attorney general ruling

AMERfCAN OENT L ASSOCLATION

AOA GRAMNovember 9 2006

A forum for breaking news andtimely information from the ADA

Interim Guidance on Reconstituted Infant Formula

Have any of your patients ever asked what type of water should be used whenmixing powdered or liquid concentrate infant formula Information about fluorideintake for infants and young children which includes interim guidance onreconstituted infant formula is posted on ADAorg

The appropriate amount of fluoride is essential to prevent tooth decay but fluorideintake above the recommended level for a child s age creates a risk for enamelfluorosis in teeth during their development before eruption through the gumsAccording to fluoride intake guidelines set by the Institute of Medicine the amount offluoride recommended for babies under a year old is less than that for older childrenand adults Infants less than one year old may be getting more than the optimalamount of fluoride which may increase their risk of enamel fluorosis if their primarysource of nutrition is powdered or liquid concentrate infant formula mixed with watercontaining fluoride

Recent developments led the ADA to develop the interim guidance Last spring theNational Research Council released a report on naturally occurring fluoride indrinking water While not the major focus of the report research was cited that raisedthe possibility that infants could receive a greater than optimal amount of fluoridefrom reconstituted baby formula Then on Oct 14 the FDA said bottlers could claimthat fluoridated water can reduce the risk of dental cavities or tooth decay but thatthis claim could not be used on water marketed to infants

More research is needed before definitive recommendations can be made but in themeantime if parents and caregivers are concerned the ADA s interim auidanqe

provides steps to simply and effectively reduce fluoride intake durinQ a baby s firstLear of life Essentially the ADA supports the pediatricians recommendations on thebenefits of breast feeding and notes that using ready to feed formula for bottle fedbabies will keep their fluoride intake under 10M limits If using a product that needs tobe reconstituted parents and caregivers should consider using water that has no orlow levels of fluoride

Visit ADAorQ for additional information on fluoride If you have questions aboutproducts containing fluoride contact John Malone 2878 malonej@ada orQ Mthquestions about community water fluoridation contact Jane McGinley 2862

mCQinlevi@ada org

This ADA E Gram is brought to you by ADA Member Advantage a program sponsored by ADABusiness Enterprises Inc a for profit subsidiary of the American Dental Association Copyrinht @2006 American Dental Association Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without priorwritten permission See Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further legal information

To unsubscribe from our e mail list please click here

I

ORDINANCE NO

AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION TO TITLE 14 CHAPTER 4RESTRICTING THE ADDITION OF CHEMICALS OR SUBSTANCES TO THE

DRINKING WATER

THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS

A new section shall be added to Ashland Municipal Code Title 14 Chapter 4 whichshall read

14 04 050 Water System Chemical Addition Restrictions

a It shall be unlawful and apublic nuisance for any person to introduce or add anysubstance to the public water supply for the purpose of acting as medication for humans

b Notwithstanding paragraph a the City ofAshland will treat its drinking water to makeit safe and potable in such a way that it meets Maximum Contaminant Level Goalsestablished pursuant to the federal Safe Drinking Water Act 42 US c 300f et S q

c Also not withstanding paragraph a the City of Ashland may accept water into itspublic water supply from another governmental iurisdiction in the event of an emergencyin which the additional water were needed due to a catastrophe even if that iurisdictionadds substance s for the purpose of acting as medication for humans

The foregoing ordinance was first read on the day ofPASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2006Barbara M Christensen City Recorder

2006 and duly

SIGNED and APPROVED this day ofJohn W Morrison Mayor

2006

Reviewed as to formMichael Franell City Attorney