Good afternoon, Mayor Leffingwell and councilmembers.  Today I want to quote from the graduate level college textbook ECOSCIENCE, co-written in 1970 by President Barak Obama’s science advisor, John Holdren.  This is taken from Chapter 10, titled:  “Direct Assaults on Well-Being.”

Quote:  The scientific evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of mass fluoridation at the generally recommended level of 1 mg/l (1 ppm) is not as good as it ought to be, but neither is there convincing evidence that it is harmful.” Unquote.  I would submit that today, 40 years later, there is overwhelming evidence that it’s harmful, especially to the bones and thyroid. 

Quote:  Perhaps the strongest argument against mass fluoridation of drinking water is that individual treatment with fluoride is simple and can be supplied cheaply on public funds for those wishing to use it. Unquote.  I disagree that it’s the strongest argument, but it is a strong one and in fact our homespun hero John Henry Faulk—the guy we named our main library after—made it back in 1973, before the City Council, when opposing water fluoridation in Austin.  

Quote:  “…fluoride pollution from a variety of industrial activities is a significant problem…Fluorides are discharged into the air from steel, aluminum, phosphate, pottery, glass and brick works…Intentional addition of fluorides in fluoridation programs makes a modest but not negligible contribution to the human-created inputs to the environment.  The main problems encountered in trying to evaluate health threats from fluoride pollution are familiar ones:  the boundary between safe and unsafe levels is a fuzzy one, some individuals are more sensitive than others, and fluorides may act in combination with other pollutants to do damage at concentrations where the fluorides alone would not be harmful. Unquote.  I would add here that everything he just said about health threats from fluoride environmental pollution applies equally to fluoride ingested through drinking water.  

Quote:  Fluorides have been shown to concentrate in food chains, and evidence suggesting a potential for significant ecological effects is accumulating.  Unquote.  Remember that he has just described our input of fluoride to the eco-system through intentional fluoridation as not neglibible.  

This is Obama’s science advisor speaking almost 40 years ago.  Would Obama hire a dummy for the job?  I don’t think so.  Thank you.

***  
Kudos to Sally Stride for first posting this important information at http://fluoridedangers.blogspot.com/.