By a 6-5 vote Jan. 21, the Rolla City Council approved a motion to notify city water customers, as well as the state government, that it intends to pass an ordinance 90 days hence that will cease fluoridation of the city’s water supply.
Well, that is the intention of the current city council, but before that 90-day waiting period ends, there will be a city election that could change the configuration of the council.
When Councilman Dr. Robert Kessinger pointed that fact out, following the vote, Mayor Lou Magdits said, “Well, then, you shouldn’t have done this tonight. I mean, frankly speaking, this was not the kind of decision to take when half of you are up for election. But you did.”
There will be six openings, one in each ward, but two council members, Kessinger in Ward 4 and Matt Fridley in Ward 3, did not file for re-election.
So, although terms of half the council members end in April, only four of that number are interested in returning for another two-year term.
Thus, it appears that fluoridation could become a key issue in the general municipal election. Elimination of fluoride from the water will require an ordinance, and that will require two public readings and at least a 7-5 vote in favor of removal.
At the meeting Jan. 21 (held on Tuesday because of the Monday federal holiday honoring the late Dr. Martin Luther King), the vote to notify the state of the intent to eliminate fluoride was favored by Mattias Penner, Ward 1; Megan Johnson and Nathan Chirban, Ward 2; Dr. Kessinger, Ward 4, Victoria Steen and Tina Balch, both Ward 6.
Voting against the removal were Josh Vroman, Ward 1; Steve Jackson and Matt Fridley, Ward 3; William Hahn II, Ward 4, and Kevin Greven, Ward 5.
Kessinger and Johnson, the two leaders of the anti-fluoridation campaign that began in October, both end their current two-year terms in April. Johnson has filed for re-election and has two challengers.
Vroman, Fridley and Steen have all filed for re-election, and all have challengers. The open seat in Ward 5 has been vacant since Councilman Stanley Mayberry moved from the ward.
That means the people voting on the ordinance to remove fluoride could be people different from the people who voted on the motion last week to begin the removal process.
That process is to notify Rolla Municipal Utilities customers, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services
Missouri Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Health and Senior Services.
The 90 days gives Rolla water drinkers and voters plenty of time to think about it and comment on it.
After the 90-day period ends, the council can then work on the next part of the process, first reading of the ordinance to remove the substance that has been added to the water since the late Sixties to promote strong tooth enamel and to lower the rate of tooth decay.
The vote on the ordinance to remove fluoride will require seven favorable votes. Seven is a majority of the 12 council seats.
The vote on the motion to begin the process required a majority of those present. It was not an ordinance.
Fluoridation has been a contentious issue for many decades. Previous councils in those years heard requests from time to time that fluoride be removed from the water. One resident who carried on an anti-fluoridation campaign with regular letters to the editor of the Rolla Daily News contended that fluoride played a part in his wife’s death.
In October, council members Johnson and Kessinger began a new campaign to remove fluoride, based on a U.S. district court judge’s ruling on a California court case that stated fluoride lowers children’s IQ.
The council had earlier responded to questions and fears about fluoride. In 2015, the council voted to recommend lowering the fluoride level from 1.2 parts per million to 0.7 parts per million, the generally accepted safe level. Rolla Municipal Utilities followed that recommendation; in fact, Councilman Hahn reported that he had been informed the level was even lower than 0.7 parts per million.
Addition of fluoride back in the sixties was led by the dentists in the community, and they were led by Dr. Carl James. They pushed for fluoridation because it hardens or strengthens the enamel in children’s teeth.
Councilman Fridley, a retired teacher and school principal, spoke to the council about that need, especially for children who drink well water or water from rural water districts that do not fluoridate. He said it was tragic to see the amount of tooth decay in children who had not received fluoride from birth (or before from their mothers).
The several dentists who spoke to the council at previous meetings noted that although they make money from filling cavities in the enamel of children’s teeth, they promote fluoridation because so many children, especially from poorer families who cannot afford regular visits to dentists.
Rolla began fluoridating water in 1968 after a referendum vote that was backed by 59 percent of the voters. Since then, multiple generations of Rolla residents have been affected by the alleged IQ-lowering quality of fluoride.
Mayor Magdits offered a comment in favor of continued fluoridation before the council voted to end the procedure.
“From my perspective, the benefit of fluoridated water for dental health is well-known, well-studied and certainly time-tested across both the United States and the world,” the mayor said.
He contended that studies questioning the safety of fluoridated water looked at water supplies where the level was far higher, twice as much generally, than what is in Rolla water.
“We all know that too much of a good thing is bad for you,” the mayor said.
Moreover, he noted, the California lawsuit that started this latest move against Rolla fluoridation is being appealed by the Environmental Protection Agency to a higher court.
“For some reason, they do not agree with the judge, probably on the technical merits of that decision,” the major said.
Continuing, Magdits said, “According to people that I’ve spoken to, there are no studies of fluoride levels in the United States on IQ that have been conducted in areas with naturally low and high levels of fluoride in the water. All major health and scientific organizations are calling for a robust U.S. study.”
Ending fluoridation has “dire consequences on oral health,” he said. Evidence of that is that Buffalo, New York, and Calgary, Canada, both restarted fluoridation programs because of the significant increase in cavities.
Cavities in those cities had led to many children with having to go under general anesthesia for surgery because the cavities were endangering their health, he noted.
Regarding the alleged danger to babies in the womb who receive fluoride from their mothers who drink the water and later out of the womb when infant formula is mixed with fluoridated water, the mayor noted, “Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of OB-GYNs recommend the pregnant mothers and their babies and toddlers drink fluoridated water for the health of their teeth, as well as making the children’s permanent teeth harder in order to alleviate cavities in the future, as those teeth develop under the gum line.”
He said state health departments officials in Missouri have provided test results for ACT scores of graduating seniors, both in areas of Missouri that have naturally low and high levels of fluoride in their water, and those results were basically identical.
“ACT scores better correlate with poverty rates than fluoride levels,” he said.
And, he added in closing, fluoridation in Hong Kong and Singapore has not kept them from being in the top regions of the world “with respect to what is perceived to be smart people.”
Concluding, the mayor said, “I ask that you consider the continuation of fluoridation, while high quality studies are conducted in the United States to show if there is any harm.”
The council decided to ignore the mayor’s request.
Original article online at: https://www.phelpscountyfocus.com/news/article_b66a109a-de50-11ef-b4df-8ffbd8ce5960.html