by Brandon Turbeville

January 3, 2012
from ActivistPost Website

In our current times, good news is often hard to come by.

In a climate where war with Syria and Iran looms on the horizon, the world economic depression worsens with each passing day, and civil liberties have become something only spoken of in the past tense, there is hardly any sunshine to be found amongst the dark clouds of a gathering tyranny.
 

However, a recent decision by the Pinellas County Council provides hope not just of a lonely ray of light, it might also provide anti-fluoride activists with enough incentive and inspiration to take up their cause within their own communities all across the country, sparking a nationwide and, eventually, worldwide de-fluoridation campaign of epic proportions.

The decision, made by a narrow 4-3 vote, was to end fluoridation of the County’s water supply on December 31, 2011.

County Commissioner’s,

• Nancy Bostock

• Neil Brickfield

• John Morroni

• Norm Roche,

...were the four members courageous enough to vote “yes” to end the pollution of Pinellas County water supply, while Commissioners,

• Susan Latvala

• Karen Seel

• Ken Welch,

...voted to uphold the status quo.

The battle to end the practice of water fluoridation in Pinellas County ended up being a very controversial and bitter debate with the issue receiving national media coverage. Unfortunately (but not surprisingly), most mainstream media outlets reported the debate in a very one-sided and biased manner, with many simply distorting the facts about the arguments made as well as the people making them.

For instance, NPR’s coverage insinuated that those opposed to water fluoridation were of an extreme right-wing branch of the TEA party (as if that would automatically discount the evidence), ignoring the many other individuals opposed to dumping toxic waste into the county’s water supply.

NPR, of course, also suggested that the evidence for fluoride safety and effectiveness was overwhelming, a viewpoint which was typical of other mainstream outlets including editorials published in the Tampa Bay Times.
 

All of these outlets tended to ignore educated individuals such as Dr. Paul Connett (above video), who has reviewed the science and research (below video) surrounding fluoride and drinking water fluoridation and who has since been active in assisting communities in their effort to remove the toxic chemical compound from their water supplies.

Obviously, fluoride is neither safe nor effective as mainstream media outlets, dentists, and fluoride-proponents claim.

In fact, the side effects related to fluoride read like a laundry list of health problems from,

• cancer

• dental and skeletal fluorosis

• bone fracture

• gastrointestinal problems

• thyroid damage

• allergic reactions

• hypersensitivity

• kidney damage

• reduced IQ

• brain damage

Not only that, but fluoride is not even successful at preventing tooth decay.

Most studies show drastically low levels of success, if any at all. Even in these instances where fluoride shows a small amount of success in preventing tooth decay, it must be applied topically, not ingested in drinking water. As I mention in my book, Seven Real Conspiracies, drinking fluoride to protect your teeth is essentially the same as drinking sun block to prevent skin cancer.

Nevertheless, as expected, fluoride advocates put up a bitter fight in defense of water fluoridation, even trying to put the issue up for county-wide referendum after the commissioners had voted against adding the substance to the water supply in an obvious attempt to rely on the ignorance of the general public.

Fortunately, that effort failed along with the effort to spend twice as much money by creating a mobile fluoride van that would treat children in poor communities.

The cost of annual fluoridation is estimated at $205,000 in Pinellas County, while the mobile van aimed at the establishment's favorite targets (poor children) would cost around $532,000 a year; well over double what fluoridation itself cost. Thankfully for everyone involved, this lunacy was abandoned relatively quickly.

It should be pointed out, however, that even $205,000 is large amount of money to be wasted on such faulty science, especially in an economy like the one in which we find ourselves today. The financial argument, in and of itself, might likely be a persuasive one when an individual speaks in front of his County Council about halting fluoridation.

Of course, it should also be mentioned that Pinellas County is not the only success story to be found regarding the de-fluoridation of water supplies.

Recently, Hartford Township in Livingston County in Michigan voted to immediately end the practice of adding fluoride to the water supply after Trustee Glenn Harper brought the issue to the board. The vote in this case was 5-2.

Pinellas County and Hartford Township are not alone in their decision to remove fluoride from their water supply.

Many other cities, counties, and townships (close to 200 of them) have decided to do the same over the last few years due to the efforts of educated citizens, determined activists, and organizations like,

• Fluoride Action Network

• WaterWatch of Utah

• New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation

• National Citizens for Safe Drinking Water,

...among others.

The anti-fluoride movement is on the rise, and there are many other communities who are beginning the fight against a practice that has been entrenched in our culture for far too long.

If your community is currently being fluoridated, I encourage you to find an organization or group of individuals dedicated to reversing this practice. If no such organization exists, you can always start one yourself.

Regardless, it is important for you to get involved in your community and agitate for safe drinking water and personal choice.