Dr. Richard Sauerheber
B.A. Biology, Ph.D. Chemistry, University of CA, San Diego)
Palomar College, San Marcos,CA 92078
February 28, 2014
Metropolitan Water District
Dear Mr. Kinghlinger and Board Members:
Many people have been praying for an end to this CA massive long-standing drought to end. Now, as a large rainstorm is upon us, we are not only thankful but also are reminded how and from where we obtain our public fresh water supplies in the first place. Like rainwater, natural pristine fresh drinking water does not contain either sodium or fluoride (See my peer reviewied article at J. Env. Pub. Health 2013, article 439490).
Understand that end-use water supplies need to be maintained as pure as possible. Water consumption is a health issue and the first rule in healthcare is to first “do no harm.” Our specific potable water in Southern CA supplied by MWD is to contain only those contaminants that are unavoidable, including natural fluoride from calcium fluoride at 0.2-0.3 ppm, arsenic at < 10 ppb, etc. and any industrial emissions that up to now have not been able to be controlled up-river by the EPA, such as 80 ppm sodium ion.
Public drinking water that is legal to sell does not contain any intentionally added chemicals other than to sanitize the water as dictated by the Safe Drinking Water Act. Further, any EPA regulated contaminants to be discharged into public potable water require a permit, and any such discharge can only be conducted as an interim measure during facility maintenance, etc., as stipulated by the Clean Water Act.
Federal water law is designed to protect public water supplies from the addition of any substance, in particular EPA regulated contaminants, at any concentration, regardless of perceived usefulness by private parties. Dental officials have no rights – legally or morally – to request that MWD add toothpaste chemicals directly into any public drinking or agricultural water. Claims by these officials, that “not doing so jeopardizes childrens’ teeth,” have no legal standing and no scientific credibility.
If MWD board members actually believe that ingested fluoride is not harmful to any human consumer, then they need to read the NRC 2006 Report on Fluoride in Drinking Water in its entirety. 2) If MWD board members actually believe that adding fluorosilicic acid into water supplies is legal, then they need to read the textbook The Case Against Fluoride, 2010 by Drs. Connett, Micklem, and Beck. 3) If MWD board members actually believe that ingested fluoride is what has caused teeth caries to decline in the U.S. in recent times, then they need to read the textbooks by Dr. Philip Sutton including The Greatest Fraud: Fluoridation, 1986 and its earlier edition Fluoridation Trials, Erorrs in Omission and Commission.
We recently visited the Metropolitan Water District massive 3-D relief exhibit at the General Patton Museum, Chiriaco Summit, CA. MWD currently delivers water to customers at 44 million acre feet yearly (at 386,000 gallons per acre foot). The massive amount of fluorosilicic acid that will be required to treat this water (as desired by dental officials without legal or moral authority) amounts to about 70 million gallons of the crude fluorosilicic acid hazardous waste every year. Charging ratepayers for this material expense is a violation of CA AB733 fluoride legislation which prohibits charging either taxpayers or ratepayers to add fluoride-containing substances into public water.
Also, as you know MWD has less than 10,000 service connections and therefore the fluoridation “requirement” in CA AB733 has never actually applied to MWD. Any such infusion would be the responsibility of local water districts. In fact, that is why we have so many local water districts in So. CA to address local use concerns.
The city of Poway purchases water from MWD that is not treated with the diluted hazardous waste fluorosilicic acid. There are no penalties or any legal ramifications for MWD to sell this regular, cleaner water. On the other hand, local water districts are being sued for the increased incidence of abnormal, unsightly, permanent dental enamel fluorosis that occurs in every city that adds fluorosilicic acid into its water. Please examine the noble mission of the law firms bringing these cases and a description of this litigation at: http://publicjustice.net/what-we-do/case-stories/NemphosvNestleWaters.
To learn more about the agency Public Justice, see http://publicjustice.net/news-events/media. Public Justice attorneys Leah Nicholls and Leslie Brueckner are aiding the pioneering fluoride litigation law firms of Nidel law, and Paulson and Nace, as described at: http://www.fluoridelitigation.com/
We do not know what it will take to cause MWD to finally end this illegal, useless, harmful, and expensive practice, but end it will. As a scientific advisory for Fluoride Free Austin, Washington Action for Safe Water, San Diegans for Safe Drinking Water, California Clean Water, Fluoride Free Asheville, and on behalf of other groups having similar intent, including the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Parents of Fluoride Poisoned Children, the Sierra Club, and Greenpeace International, it is here requested that fluorosilicic acid discharges into our drinking water be ended. Please examine the problem in detail for yourselves in the above references to see why this request is proper and cannot be denied.
There is no need for you to respond to this letter in writing. We are not asking questions of you, but rather we are providing information to help you. What we need is for you to halt the infusions.
Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D. Chemistry
On behalf of residents of Southern California