Remember the Wendy’s TV commercial with the little old lady asking “Where’s the beef?” in regard to hamburger chains not having much of a beef patty between the hamburger buns? The line has become a common one to use to question the validity of a product claim or statement by politicians.
In respect to the issue of water fluoridation, we ask “Where’s the substance?”
For more than nine years we have been opposing the fluoridating of our water supply, mainly on the grounds that no chemical manufacturer will state that their fluoridation substance has been proven to be safe and effective for fighting tooth decay.
It is a fact that the main fluoridation substance used in this country is a by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry and it contains lead, arsenic and other contaminants. It is a fact that no chemical manufacturer will state that its fluoridation substance will fight tooth decay. All we hear are repeated statements about some substances being labeled as “accepted” fluoridation substances, but never a peep about the substances actually being able to fight tooth decay. This is why we repeatedly ask, “Where’s the substance?”
Obviously, fluoridation proponents are not interested in fighting tooth decay and are far more interested in pushing for the injection of a toxic sludge into our water.
Earlier this year the city formed an ad hoc committee to further study the issue and report back to the City Council with an acceptable funding contract. To no surprise, after numerous meetings the committee came back with a contract proposal that is even worse than the earlier one. The contract contains numerous areas that could stick the city with a bill.
The contract contains no requirement that the city will use a proven and tested substance to fluoridate our water. Almost every single point of concern that we brought up was ignored by the committee. Your rights, your wishes for safe water are being sold down the river.
Many of you have heard that the state Department of Public Health has threatened the city with fines unless the city proceeds with a fluoridation program. Such a threat has the appearance of being an orchestrated stunt in an attempt to give some council members cover for their upcoming sell-out vote. No city can be legally compelled to use an untested and unproven substance to fluoridate the water supply, yet the council will probably go ahead and voluntarily do it.
If the council would only tell the state that it is unable to find a substance that fights tooth decay and that it will not implement a fluoridation program until it finds such a substance, then this entire issue can be put on hold. For some sick reason, the majority of the council refuses to do so.
I have repeatedly challenged the city to hold a forum on this issue and said I would be willing to debate anyone on the legality of the issue. I asked the city to bring in the state Department of Public Health to a forum in order to answer questions from the public. I have dared our county health official to debate me on the issue. To all of these requests, the answer has been “no.” Obviously, the fluoridation proponents are scared of debating the issue and being forced to answer valid questions from the concerned public. On Tuesday, the Watsonville City Council will be deciding on the future of your water supply. You better wake up and let the council know that you do not want our precious water supply to be injected with some untested, unproven toxic sludge. If you don’t, you will have a new question to ask in the future: “How did all this lead, arsenic and other toxic waste get into our water supply?”
The answer will be that some rotten and dishonest politicians voted for it and you let them get away with it.
Stop the city from contaminating our water supply, tainting our bodies and destroying our environment by urging the council to vote no on the latest fluoridation contract.
Print 
PDF