CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO SAFE WATER GROUPS’ TESTIMONY ON 8-14-12

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO SAFE WATER GROUPS’ TESTIMONY ON 7-10-12

JAMES ROBERT DEAL ATTORNEY PLLC
PO Box 2276, Lynnwood, Washington  98036-2276
Telephone 425-771-1110, Fax 425-776-8081
James@JamesRobertDeal.com

August 14, 2012

FLUORIDATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION

Snohomish County Health District

Dr. Gary Goldbaum, Director
Shannon Affholter, Councilman, Everett
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilwoman, Edmonds
Dave Gossett, County Councilman
Linda Grafer, Councilwoman, Mukilteo
John Koster, County Councilman
Mark Lamb, Mayor, Bothell, Chair
Dave Somers, County Councilman, Chair
Dianne White, Mayor, Stanwood
Donna Wright, Councilwoman, Marysville
Stephanie Wright, County Councilwoman

 

Sent by email to: mayor@ci.stanwood.wa.us; dwright@marysvillewa.gov; John.Koster@co.snohomish.wa.us; brian.sullivan@co.snohomish.wa.us; lgrafer@ci.mukilteo.wa.us; adrienne.monillas@ci.edmonds.wa.us; klonergan@ci.lynnwood.wa.us; stephanie.wright@snoco.org; joshua.thompson@snoco.org; dave.gossett@co.snohomish.wa.us; mark.lamb@ci.bothell.wa.us;

 

Dear Civil Servants:

 

To access the links in this letter go to www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com/press-releases/8-14-12. Look for the press release dated August 14, 2012.

 

The Everett Water District delivers fluoridated water to some 700,000 Snohomish County residents, not only in Everett, where an uninformed city council and electorate voted in favor of fluoridation some 21 years ago, but also to such cities as Lynnwood, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, Bothell, Lake Stevens, Snohomish, Mill Creek, Marysville, Monroe, and unincorporated Snohomish County, where none of the city councils, the county council, or the voters in these captive consumer areas have had the opportunity to vote on this issue. We refer to these other areas and to the residents therein as “captive consumers”.

 

We call this fluoridation without representation.

 

What should captive consumers do? First, towns and cities which are fluoridated without their consent should demand that they be given water which has not been polluted by this so-called fluoride, which is actually toxic waste from the wet scrubbers of the smokestacks of phosphate fertilizer plants in Fluorida, Mexico, and China.

 

Everett has four large pipelines coming down from Spada Lake, and there is no reason why non-fluoridated water could not be provided to capitive consumers.

 

Second, elected representatives of the captive consumer towns, cities, and unincorporated areas should demand that Everett hold the captive consumer towns, cities, and unincorporated county areas harmless if they are ever sued for harm caused by so-called fluoridation.

 

Third, captive consumers should demand that Everett prove that it is insurance sufficient to cover legal defense and damages.

 

DR. GOLDBAUM IS WRONG ON NUMEROUS POINTS

 

On May 9, 2012, I wrote a letter to Dr. Goldbaum and said:

In our March 24 article, we pointed out that infants and fetuses are most vulnerable to fluoridation materials, that the toxins in fluoridation materials cross the placental barrier and the blood-brain barrier, that they damage brain tissue and reduce IQ while the fetus is still in the womb. Convincing studies show lower intelligence in fluoridated areas. Please address these issues in your response.

 

In his response dated June 1, 2012, Dr. Goldbaum stated:

Snohomish Health District:  These studies were done in China and countries outside the United States. They had significant flaws in the research designs. For example, China, along with many countries, has fluoride levels in drinking water far in excess of the 4 ppm allowed in U.S. drinking water that were not accounted for in the analysis.

 

He is saying that these studies cannot be trusted because they were from China. However, the National Institutes of Health and Harvard University say these studies can be relied on:

 

A recent report from the U.S. National Research Council (NRC 2006) concluded that adverse effects of high fluoride concentrations in drinking water may be of concern and that additional research is warranted. Fluoride may cause neurotoxicity in laboratory animals, including effects on learning and memory…

 

[C]hildren in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low fluoride areas. …

 

The results suggest that fluoride may be a developmental neurotoxicant that affects brain development at exposures much below those that can cause toxicity in adults…

 

THE ORIGIN OF FLUORIDATION

 

ALCOA was the first company to sell fluoride as a water additive. ALCOA hired Robert Kehoe, a rising star chemist with the Kettering Institute to give fluoride a shiny new patina.

 

ALCOA had an ally, the Public Health Service, at that time a branch of the military. When drinking water fluoridation began in 1945, it was pushed by the Public Health Service.

 

The Atomic Energy Commission and the Manhattan Project were also strong promoters. They wanted to know more about fluoride and – perversely – favored testing it on people. Their cynical interest was twofold: First, they wanted to know how ingestion of fluoride would affect workers. Would it make them less efficient or impair their ability to concentrate? Second, they wanted data so they could defend against the rising flood of suits for fluoride poisoning. The contribution of the Manhattan Project was to recruit dentists to spread the fluoride gospel very early on. (Christopher Bryson, The Fluoride Deception, p. 78 ff.)

 

See the Deepwater Documents from New Jersey in 1945-1946 when DuPont was being sued by farmers for the fluoride it emitted.

 

As fluoridation spread, there was not enough of ALCOA’s sodium fluoride to go around. So fluorosilicic acid, the cheaper and dirtier fluoride was substituted. The EPA required that fluoride and other toxins coming from the smokestacks of phosphate fertilizer factories be captured, but there was a problem over what to do with the resulting scrubber liquor. It could no longer go up the smokestacks or into rivers, lakes, or oceans. So it was put in our drinking water. Rebecca Hanmer, EPA executive admitted in 1983 that fluoridating water with fluorosilicic acid killed two birds with one stone, helping teeth and getting rid of toxic waste:

 

In regard to the use of fluosilicic acid as a source of fluoride for fluoridation, this Agency regards such use as an ideal environmental solution to a long-standing problem. By recovering by-product fluosilicic acid from fertilizer manufacturing, water and air pollution are minimized, and water utilities have a low-cost source of fluoride available to them.

 

MANY CITIES ARE REJECTING FLUORIDATION

 

Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Tampa and Pinellas County, Calgary, Quebec City, and many other cities in North America have terminated this vice. Everett will be in good company if it follows science instead of superstition and disavows fluoridation.

 

IRELAND COUNTY RENOUNCES FLUORIDATION

 

Thanks to the report prepared by Declan Waugh, one county in the Irish Republic has renounced fluoridation, and probably all of the Irish Republic will follow suit. Mr. Waugh’s report made it clear that fluoridation worsens heart disease.

 

Declan Waugh says:

…[T]he European Court of Justice in 2005 determined that no ‘medicinal product’ — defined in their words as “any substance presented for treating or preventing disease in human beings” — may be given to consumers without appropriate scientific risk assessments taking into account the varying degrees of sensitivity of different consumer groups.

In the case of water fluoridation, high-risk groups include infants, diabetics, individuals with nutrient deficiencies, the older population and people with thyroid disease and kidney failure.

SALMON RUNS IN DECLINE

 

The Herald reports that the salmon run on the Snohomish River was the worst ever. Both Everett and Snohomish dump their treated sewage outfall, containing around 1.0 ppm fluorosilicic acid, into the Snohomish River. To salmon fluoride stinks. They turn back, swim in circles, or die when the fluoride level in the river exceeds .2 ppm.

 

NEW HAMPSHIRE PASSES FLUORIDE INFANT WARNING LAW

 

New Hampshire will require notification that 6-month-olds should not be routinely fed infant formula mixed with fluoridated water to avoid discoloring babies’ unerupted teeth. The following notice must be included in the annual water quality report:

 

Your public water supply is fluoridated. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, if your child under the age of 6 months is exclusively consuming infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, there may be an increased chance of dental fluorosis.

 

The notice would have been placed in each monthly water bill, however, fluoridationist dentists pressured the legislature to weaken the law, and the warning will be issued only annually.

 

BURDEN OF PROOF

 

Fluoridationists have a very difficult, actually impossible, burden of proof. To support fluoridation they must prove that fluoridation is safe, effective, and legal.

 

Fluoridationists admit that it is not safe because they admit that parents must be careful to greatly limit the amount of fluoridated water they use to make infant formula. Fluoridationists also admit that 41% of children are suffering dental fluorosis, and around 12% of children are getting the mild, moderate, and severe forms of fluorosis, which are noticeable and embarrassing.

 

Flluoridationists must prove that fluoridation is safe, and to do that they must prove that fluoridation does not harm fetuses, infants, diabetics, those with kidney disease, those with thyroid disease, and those who are hypersensitive to fluoride. Fluoridationists must prove that fluoride does not cause bone cancer, damage to the thyroid, damage to the pineal gland. There is significant evidence that fluoridation causes all these harms.

 

Fluroidationists must prove that fluoridation is effective, and to do that fluoridationists must overcome substantial evidence that says it is only slightly effective or is not effective at all. Fluoridationists only claim that fluoridation reduces dental decay 10% to 30%. Dental decay has declined just as much in non-fluoridated continental Europe as it has in the United States, so there must be other factors reducing dental decay.

 

Fluoridationists must prove that fluoridation is legal. It violates a host of laws and is not approved by any federal or state agency. It violates a person’s right to give informed consent to medical treatment and to decline medical treatment.

 

Conversely, the burden of proof on the safe water groups is much less difficult. We only need prove that fluoridation is not effective, not safe for any of the many groups it harms, or not legal.

 

A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM DR. GOLDBAUM IS REQUESTED

I am demanding a written response from Dr. Goldbaum to my letter to the Snohomish Health District dated July 10, 2012, and to this letter dated August 14, 2012. If he does not respond, the Snohomish Health District should concede that he agrees with our assessment that fluoridation is not safe, not effective, and not legal.

 

THE HEALTH DISTRICT SHOULD DROP ITS ENDORSEMENT OF FLUORIDATION

 

The city of Everett is relying on the endorsement of the Snohomish Health District to continue its requirement that Everett water be fluoridated. We are asking that the Health District drop its endorsement.

 

OTHER CITIES AND SNOHOMISH COUNTY SHOULD DEMAND SAFE WATER

 

The captive consumers of unincorporated Snohomish county and the cities other than Everett which buy water from Everett should demand that they receive safe water not contaminated by so-called fluoride, 2) that until they receive safe water that Everett indemnify and hold them harmless against any liability they might incur for harm to their citizens, and 3) that Everett demonstrate that it has adequate insurance coverage in case of suit for liability.

DOCUMENTATION

To access the links in this letter go to www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com/press-releases/8-14-12. Look for the press release dated August 14, 2012.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

James Robert Deal, Attorney
WSBA #8103

 

Copies sent to:

 

Ron Gipson, Everett City Council President

Paul Roberts, Council Member

Jeff Moore, Council Member

Arlan Hatloe, Council Member

Brenda Stonecipher, Council Member

Shannon Affholter

Ray Stephanson, Mayor

Jim Iles, City Attorney

Ramsey Rammerman, Assistant City Attorney

 

Sent by email to: everettpw@ci.everett.wa.us; dwilliams@ci.everett.wa.us;  jmoore@ci.everett.wa.us; AHatloe@ci.everett.wa.us; saffholter@ci.everett.wa.us;  PRoberts@ci.everett.wa.us; rgipson@ci.everett.wa.us; BStonecipher@ci.everett.wa.us;  rramerman@ci.everett.wa.us;  kreardon@ci.everett.wa.us;  steve.deem@doh.wa.gov;