Meeting With Seattle City Attorneys 1-9-2012

Print Friendly

(click here to go to press releases)

On Monday January 9, 2012, members of Fluoride Class Action, Washington Action for Safe Water, and Americans for liberty met with two attorneys on the staff of the Seattle City Attorney. They are Darby DuComb, chief of staff under Peter Holmes, and Engel Lee, counsel for Seattle Utilities.

Listen to an audio recording of our meeting with Seattle City Attorneys.

 

See video 1. Unfortunately, the opening minutes of the meeting are missing.

See video 2, Raw Footage

***

Read this follow up letter from Fluoride Class Action to the Seattle City Attorneys, January 10 2012

Read this letter sent by Fluoride Class Action to Jenny Durkin, US Attorney in Seattle.

Read Dr. Sauerheber’s reflections on the meeting:

I want to clarify that Brent Foster, in his you tube video, correctly, that the Oregon legislature did not ban fluoridation. What it did is refuse to pass a law requiring it. Local  water districts in Oregon can still vote to fluoridate, as Beaverton and Corvalis has done.

I liked Audreys’ statements about vitamin D in African Americans as a possible link to calcium deficiency, which in turn would lead to increased fluorosis and other harms, including lowered IQ in infants and brain damage and miscarriage in fetuses.

I liked Dr. John’s comment that the Teotia study, the largest in the world on water fluoride, which indeed proves that calcium deficiency causes caries– which fits in with Audrey’s statement – and of course the bogus idea that water fluoride decrease caries incidence.

***

The San Diego city lawyer argued that it will take a KPBS special to wake people up to actually get something done. I contacted KPBS here in San Diego where it originated and they are not interested in the topic in the slightest.  In fact, they refused to televise Dr. Connett when he came to give a seminar to the Graduate School of Public Health. The professor friend of mine who allowed Paul to speak was ridiculed by other faculty in her department.

6 thoughts on “Meeting With Seattle City Attorneys 1-9-2012

  1. Pingback: WASHINGTON ACTION FOR SAFE WATER » Washington Environmental Council

  2. Pingback: Lead, Arsenic, Hydrogen Fluoride, Silicofluoride in Drinking Water » Notice to NSF

  3. Pingback: FLUORIDE CLASS ACTION » Letter to US Attorney in Seattle

  4. Pingback: FLUORIDE CLASS ACTION » Letter to US Attorney Durkin in Seattle

  5. Jim

    I sent this link with a note to all of the Ormond Beach Fl city commission , City Manager,Utilities manager, water plant operator. Have sent them several of your articles but we still have only one commissioner trying to get a second for this to be a agenda item. We do have 3 attorneys as commissioners with 2 newer on the commission with less then 2 years. Years ago I had been banned from ever speaking on fluoridation topic for public comments. This was a rule of 2 with speak twice and never again. That has been changed now to where all are welcomed to share their concerns during the meeting for 3 minutes limit.
    Just wanted to let you know you rang out the clearest but had to listen closely for some of the others. I do have some hearing issues. Now the ball is in their court. Will they step up and do the right thing or resort to cut and paste policy statements in a cop out? We will see what they are made of.

  6. Jim

    This is perfect. Now we have a template for waht cities might be expected to do. Actually have the legal staff listen and follow up with due dilgence research on the points made. It would be helpful to have a transcript as i do much better reading then listening. Also can keep who is speaking better in mind then. Will listen later to the whole thing. Time tight right now. I will mention this to Rae at Fluoride free Austin. This is a example of what to shoot for.
    For myself I got to meet with many staff but none would respond during the meetings and only one response was given later but not answering any of the points raised. Just cut and paste endorsements as standard so often. Sort of waste of time that way.
    It will be not be easy for the attorneys to ignore the legal risk of harming citizens. The response will be interesting. Thanks again James for the great work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

18 − one =