Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Request for Truthfulness and Full Disclosure in Annual Charlottesville Water Quality Reports
Submitted to Charlottesville City Council
Kenneth Case

May 16, 2012


1.   Current data from the CDC does not support the statement “Fluoride is a water additive which promotes strong teeth.”(1)   The statement should read: “Fluoride ingested during tooth development can result in a range of visually detectable changes in enamel opacity because of hypomineralization.  These changes have been broadly termed enamel fluorosis, certain extremes of which are cosmetically objectionable.”(2)

2.   The true statement “Fluoridated water should not be used to reconstitute powdered infant formula.” should be included in the Water Quality Report.(3)  The statement should also be included with utility bills.  (See* on next page)

3.   The CDC reports that in the last survey of US children aged 12-15, 40.7% had dental fluorosis.  3.6% had moderate      and severe dental fluorosis, up from 22.6% and 1.3% in the previous survey.(4)  Blacks are disproportionately affected by fluorosis.  Studies show Black children have twice the fluorosis as white children.  Fluorosis in Blacks tends to be more severe compared to whites.(5)  Parents and caregivers should be advised to carefully monitor fluoride intake.

4.    Individuals consuming abnormally large quantities of water need to be informed to drink bottled water.            These include people with kidney problems, diabetics, athletes, outdoor workers and military personnel.(6)  

5.   A 14 year investigation into the effects of fluoride ingestion determined that one percent of the group reacted adversely to the fluoride.  The reactions affected the dermatologic, gastro-intestinal and neurological systems.          Eczema, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, epigastric distress, emesis and headache occurred with the use of fluoride.(7)  People exposed to water fluoridation need to be informed that in studies, 1% experienced adverse reactions.

6.   Ethics require advising the public about any warnings of possible harm, especially when in the Special Precautions section the MSDS that accompanies delivery.  Environmental concerns also need to be observed and addressed.(8)

7.   Higher blood lead levels have been reported in children living in communities that receive fluoride-treated water.(9)  Cities have reported reduced lead levels in water when fluoridation stopped.(10)  Cognitive impairment is a serious issue and due consideration should be given to the multiple warnings about increases in lead levels.

8.   Information in neurotoxicologist Phyllis Mullenix’s letter to the School Health Advisory Committee in Lee County, Florida should be passed on to people of child bearing age so that they can make informed decisions should an uninformed doctor, dentist or pediatrician describe systemic fluoride as safe and effective for their children.(11)

9.   In 1980 the Virginia Department of Health asked toxicologist Brian Dementi to review the available literature relating to the health effects of fluoride.  In the conclusion of his 41 page report he said “With regard to fluoridation, this writer is of the opinion that the evidence of adverse health effects is of such magnitude and human beings so varied in their individual constitution, state of health at any moment, eating and drinking habits, etc., that it is inappropriate to say that fluoridation is a totally healthful and safe practice for all.  Widespread exposure to fluoride coupled with an inadequate data base substantiating it to be safe is a cause of great concern.”(12)

10.   Owners of horses should be informed that studies have shown that horses drinking fluoridated water for long  periods of time developed signs of fluoride intoxication, e.g. dental fluorosis, crooked legs, hoof deformities, allergic reactions etc.  In addition to horses, a variety of other animals have shown signs of fluoride toxicity.(13)

11.   The foregoing statements need to be taken seriously.  If health issues alone aren’t enough to give one pause, understand that a Complaint for Damages has been filed that states:  “Defendants know or should have known that their products, when taken as intended, cause and contribute to an increased risk of persistent and/or permanent serious and dangerous side effects including, without limitation, cognitive impairment and dental fluorosis.”(14)

12.   The statement “Fluoride is added at the water treatment plant for the benefit of industry.” is a true statement that should be included in the Water Quality Report under Typical Source of Contamination.  Documentation here:

*Infant fluoride intake when powdered formula is reconstituted with fluoridated water = up to 1.57 mg/day in a 3 

month old.(Levy)  Tolerable Upper Intake = 0.7 mg/day meaning a dose of more than double the limit.(CDC)  As stated earlier, 3.6% of surveyed US children aged 12-15 had moderate and severe dental fluorosis.(CDC)  Severe dental fluorosis occurs when developing teeth are exposed to excessive amounts of fluoride. There is a disparity between Blacks and whites with Blacks having twice the fluorosis that tends to be more severe.(NRC)  Repair is difficult and costly.(JCDA, BMJ)  Plus, the relatively acid environment of the stomach ensures that more than 90% of ingested fluoride will be in the form of hydrogen fluoride.(Ekstrand)  Hydrogen fluoride damages cells and causes them to not work properly.(CDC, JADA)  Hydrogen fluoride has been listed as a special health hazard by the State of New Jersey.(Univar MSDS)  Hydrogen fluoride is so corrosive to tissues that Dreisbach’s Handbook of Poisoning: Prevention, Diagnosis & Treatment says that if it has penetrated under the fingernails, consider removing the nails using local anesthesia.  Link to all references.(15)

Allowing a 3 month old infant to ingest 1.57mg of a topically reactive fluoride dental agent is neither safe nor effective.


(1)   MMWR, Oct. 22, 1999:  Earlier beliefs of systemic action wrong.

(2)  MMWR, Aug. 17, 2001:  Action topical, Ductal saliva ineffective.

(3)  Published warnings about using fluoridated water with powdered formula.

(4)  CDC Data Brief, Nov. 2010. Fluorosis = 40.7% total, 3.6% mod/severe.


Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride (NRC): Dubious genesis of dose, scientific base weak, fluorosis seen at only 0.4 mg/L.

80.9% fluorosis, 14% moderate-to-severe in Augusta, GA.  Blacks vs. whites fluorosis rates.  Symptoms of skeletal fluorosis.

Also, World Health Organization (WHO) says skeletal fluorosis may be misdiagnosed as rheumatoid or osteoarthritis.

(6)  Warnings to diabetics, consumers of large amounts of water.  2006 NRC discussion of concerns about high water intake.


Feltman, DDS, Dental Digest 1956; 62: 353-357: Progress Report:  1% of people had adverse reaction to fluoride.

States that avoiding undesirable reactions to fluoride is more problematic and complicated when water is fluoridated.

Feltman and Kosel, Journal of Dental Medicine 1961; 16: 190-99:  Fourteen years of investigation—Final report.

(8)   Material Safety Data Sheet showing Special Precautions comments

that were not passed on to consumers.  Univar MSDS with Hydrogen Fluoride and specific Environmental Warnings.

(9)  Fluoride increases lead levels in blood:  Toxicology, 2010 Apr 30.

(10)  When fluoridation was stopped, lead levels dropped.

(11)  Fluoridation and neurotoxicity found to be linked.

(12)   Virginia Department of Health Toxicology Report.

(13)  Links to documents showing harm to animals.

(14)  Legal Complaint for Damages filed for “cognitive impairment and dental fluorosis.”

(15)  Documentation of fluoridated water danger to infants.

FYI  R. Foulkes, MD.  Why he changed mind.  Evaluates Kingston/Newburgh.  Proceedings 1951.  Why EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation.  Wm. Hirzy, Ph.D. Fluoride News Tracker Blog covers escalating dental woes in fluoridated communities.   State Rep. Hensley, MD, recommends that Tennessee water systems stop fluoridating.  Why I Changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation. (See revealing graph at end)  David Kennedy, DDS, explains to California officials why fluoridation is harmful.  EPA Toxicologist told to quit submitting fluoride toxicity information.  Legal recourse when officials give misleading and incomplete statements.  Texas dentist identified fluoridation problems at the very beginning.  Fluoride promoters’ promises unmet, dental crises in major US cities.  Cosmetic Dentist explains lifetime costs of repairing fluorosis.  Chemist Dr. Paul Connett argues against water fluoridation.  Prominent dental researcher outlines his arguments.  Fluoride an “enabler” in the cancer process.  Informed dental students win.  Case studies of fluoride toxicity.

More at: