Arkansas Water Districts Unable To Find Fluoride Which Complies With NSF 60 Rule

by | Jun 16, 2012 | Arkansas, NSF | 2 comments

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Carroll-Boone Water District
Water Operators Speak Out Against
Non-compliance of a Regulated Chemical
Who’s Regulating the Regulators?
Written by Rene Fonseca,
Carroll-Boone Water District
In 2011, the Arkansas State Legislature very quickly passed a partially unfunded mandate that requires most water companies to add fluoride chemicals into public water supplies, not to purify the water but to medicate you. State legislators were lobbied by outsiders, and few Arkansas residents who oppose fluoridation were alerted. Water suppliers weren’t involved. So now there are many problems arising from this ill-advised fluoridation mandate including that fluoridation chemicals are not pure.

Our Arkansas Department of Health (ADH) has concluded and confirmed that fluoridation products, in the water industry, do contain contaminants not limited to just lead, arsenic, copper and radionuclides. The ADH states further that NSF test results have concluded that fluoride chemicals do not add a measurable amount of these contaminants to the water supply. (NSF is the private company that regulates water additives.)
The Arkansas Department of Health requires Water Districts to follow NSF/ANSI standard 60 and has confirmed that the NSF information for certification should be supplied by the supplier of the chemicals. But the fluoridation chemical suppliers won’t provide this, even though we have asked for them repeatedly.
NSF repeatedly represents on its web site and in the NSF 60 document entitled “NSF 60 Drinking Water Treatment Chemicals – Health Effects” that for fluoridation products to receive the NSF/ANSI Standard 60 mark of approval, they must be subjected to toxicological “studies”, “toxicity studies”, “assays”, and “testing” of many types. Further, NSF represents that it requires “toxicology review to determine that the product is safe at its maximum use level”. Some of the studies to be done are: “assays of genetic toxicity, acute toxicity (1 to 14 d exposure), short-term toxicity (14 to 28 d exposure), subchronic toxicity (90 d exposure), reproductive toxicity, developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, chronic toxicity (including carcinogenicity), and human data (clinical, epidemiological, or occupational) when available”, “supplemental studies … including mode or mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, sensitization, endocrine disruption”, “studies using routes of exposure other than ingestion”, “structure activity relationships, physical and chemical properties, and any other chemical specific information relevant to the risk assessment”, “qualitative risk assessment approach … or a quantitative risk assessment approach”, “gene mutation assay and a chromosomal aberration assay”, “assays of genetic toxicity, and supplemental toxicity studies”, subchronic toxicity study”, “studies using alternate routes of exposure, alternate assays of genetic toxicity, and supplemental toxicity studies other than those specified”, “quantitative risk estimation”, “studies for the evaluation of reproductive and developmental toxicity”.
Thirteen months have lapsed since CBWD has requested NSF/ANSI standard 60 section 3.2.1 information requiring proper product disclosure and toxicological information and studies from 49 manufacturers and suppliers in the United States and Canada. CBWD also requested an assurance of safety and effectiveness of the manufacturer’s product in fulfilling the goals and intent of Act 197.
To date, Carroll-Boone Water District has not received any reply to their request. Since February 2012, CBWD has been notified by our engineers that we can no longer obtain sodium flurosilicates or sodium fluoride in the United States and have been working jointly with Hawkins Inc., a chemical supplier, to obtain NSF/ANSI standard 60 product disclosure from overseas manufacturers.
We know for a fact that fluoridation products used in the water industry are highly toxic (acute oral toxicity for a man is about 6 grams). We also know that sodium flurosilicates contain elements that are neurotoxins and radionuclides such as thorium. We don’t know how the product was formulated or what level of concentration of these toxins are present in the product when it is delivered to a water treatment plant WITHOUT the information required by NSF/ANSI standard 60 section 3.2.1 : information that no one entity is able or willing to provide.
We cannot accept Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) or certificates of analysis predicated on tests results obtained from dilution of the raw product. We again are requesting for manufacturers to submit proper disclosure of information required under NSF/ANSI standard 60.
I attended a meeting in Harrison, Arkansas, on January 12, 2012 with representatives of four water districts which oppose mandatory fluoridation. We met to discuss financial and public health concerns with members of the Arkansas Legislature. When I posed questions of product disclosure and public health concerns, a state representative told me that “No one back there (referring to the State Capitol ), wanted to hear anything about public health.” My jaw dropped, and I hoped that it was only this legislator’s impression and not reality!
I attended a Carroll County Republican Committee meeting, held in Berryville, Arkansas, that hosted candidates running in the recent primary elections. I asked our local Representative, Mr. Bryan King, if elected to the Senate, would he be willing to introduce or support a Bill requiring full disclosure of fluoride products in their raw state as required by NSF/ANSI standard 60.
He replied most definitely. He told the audience how he voted against mandatory fluoridation on three different occasions in committee and on the House floor. He mentioned how lobbyists would speak with lawmakers in the halls convincing them to vote yes and offering contributions to election campaigns. Mr King told those present that he did not listen to the lobbyists but instead choose to listen to the wishes of the people in his district and voted NO on Act 197.
Representative King told us if someone would introduce a Bill in the House next session, like Representative Loy Mauch’s Water Additive Act, He would lead the charge in the Senate to try and advance such a Bill for passage.
I would like to remind everyone that every seat in the Arkansas State House and Senate is up for election this November. You owe it to your health and the health of your family to attend local meetings, ask questions, and see if candidates are aware of the challenges water districts face and the potential dangers associated with fluoridation of water supplies. If they don’t know or if they don’t care to find out the truth, we should send them packing.
So, you see, your voice does count. You only have to speak up and exercise your rights. Speak up and educate your family and neighbors about water fluoridation. Question your local candidates for office on their position and knowledge on water fluoridation products used in the water industry. I urge everyone located throughout the State of Arkansas that has issues with this mandate to
There are very few things in life more important or basic than one’s health. The time is NOW to protect your health and your families’ health. YOU are the ONE that has to take action!
Rene Fonseca
On behalf of all 12 CBWD Water Operators in opposition to mandate.
John Summers, Plant Mgr.
James Allison, office Mgr.
Eric Torgerson, Rick Boling, Mike Bailes,Tom Dugger, Barry Connell, Don Crawford, Rick Thomas, Chris Dulin, water operators.
All operators listed above including myself, hold a Class Four(highest license afforded by state)Water Treatment License and a Class Four Water Distribution License from Arkansas Department of Health.


  1. Jim

    Wanted to correct the name of the Holly Hill Attorney-It is Scott Simpson (not Smith).

    For some more backround the then Mayor Roland Via hade when running for Mayor loudly and clearly spoke out at least twice spoke out that when he became Mayor the first thing he woulde do is end fluoridation. He was the guest expert on a health talk show on the evils of fluoridation. The large audience was assured if they voted for him he would get fluoridation ended. So he did two hour long shows on what was wrong with fluoridation. He was elected Mayor. Fast foreward when I started talking to cities to halt fluoridation back in 2005. Lots of dirty tricks like Ormond Beach banning me from speaking after putting out a transcript of me speaking 13 times to other city managers and leading dentists. In trying to get me silenced. Then Mayor Fred Costell Ormond Beach got the health department to host a secret meeting with silencing me as a agenda item. Wghen I discovered this months later they claimed no transcript, recording or list of who attended existed as it was not a public records meeting. Understand the State Helath department , State ADA boss and local health department all spoke trying to promote fluoridation and silence me. I did get the power points but never found out their plans against me a private citizen. My dentist Mayor claimed he did not attend and could not tell me what happened and the health department refused except fot the power points which were standard PR BS.
    So I asked Mayor Via what he was doing about fluoridation when I saw him outside city hall. He said you don’t understand its’s Political. then walked away. A year later his response was He could take it or leave it. Then later as a talok show host when I gave some science on fluoridation he told me’If I kept on talking crazy like that everyone would loose respect for me. Maybe he has total amnesia of of all he knew aqbout the evils of fluoridation. Maybe it is just all political for him and he will flip again? Would you trust him? How could we? Anyway he is running for office again right now. Keeping your word should mean something, doing the right thing to protect people from a know risk is simple. By the way he also sold filters and advises everyone have a filter or they are the filter( old filter salesman joke) . Exactly how should they know to protect themselves with government not warning them? Safe for all, and everyone benefits is the opposite of a warning. I am fed up with lying liars and people in government turning their backs on the truth.
    Get some backbone and stand up like Carroll-Boone water operators for protecting the public. Wally Babb got fired for doing the same thing acouple years aqo.

  2. jim

    Sent this list of concerns about fluoridation product to several cities and all of their commissioners and city managers. Response back from Holly hill was short and simple. The voters spoke 3 to 1 on this issue. thanks Jim McCroskey City manager Holly Hill
    What he did not mention is all the charter changes were voted down b in a just vote no campaign showing massive distrust by the voters. This also was not a for or against fluoridation vote but to allow the commission to make the decision as the charter makes it mandatory. Back years ago when I was trying to get them to at least notify of the NOV 9 ADA baby formula warning Attorney Smith for Holly Hill warned against notification as he thought it put Holly Hill at risk. He did not express any concern about putting babies at risk.So he is willing to harm but just not admit they are aware of this proven risk or make any effort to give informed consent. Government at its very worst in action. McCroskey follows this low standard for not protecting those he is sworn and paid to protect.
    Carroll-Boone Arkansas water plant operators have set the bar high in attempting to protect their customers. Holly Hill and Daytona Beach flat refuse to warn those at risk they full well know they put at risk. The Volusia County Health department will admit the warning exists but only when asked. They also called fluoridation the foundation of all public health policy. Fraud ,Deception , harm and no benefit seems more like quicksand for those they proudly harm. Ormond Beach put out a warning after the NOv 9 ADA egram came out in secret to dentists about risk of fluoridation for infants. They have a warning on their website but most parents are still not aware. Many on the commission deny any risk or harm as possible except for Troy Kent of Zone 2 who can not get a second to discuss the issue. A recent newspaper article gave several quotes that show shameful ignorance and lack of concern by commissioners. I really thought attorneys would be smarter-we have three attorneys of 5 commission members. They also did a cable TV Warning back in 2007 at my request as Cable people would not do it for me. That did the infant formula warning to the entire county for 2 weeks. Try your cable company as it was free and on two channels 24 hours a day.


  1. Lead, Arsenic, Hydrogen Fluoride, Silicofluoride in Drinking Water » Letter to Chad about Kidneys - [...] [...]

Submit a Comment

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

three × five =

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Donate to Fluoride Class Action


Products I Use, Like, and Recommend

Search the NRC 2006 Report on Fluoride

Recommended Products

My Water Distiller


My Fluoride Meter


The Fluoride Song