At a time when many are calling out for greater public participation, I found it distasteful that the Herald would publish an editorial (Nov. 7) asserting that “the plan to ask Durango voters if they would prefer to remove fluoride from the city’s water supply is a bad idea.”

The rationale used was that the benefits of flouride for cavity reduction in dental health are very well-settled and beyond dispute, and that this is an issue that should be determined by scientists.

I strongly disagree. I believe we should have a say about our health.

Presently, it seems to me that fluoride is actually being shoved down our throats and into our pores (via baths/showers), and I don’t much care for the feeling.

Your editorial makes it sound as if all the evidence is in, and the effectiveness and safety of fluoride in our water is clearly established, but this is far from the truth. Studies have uncovered potential dangers, and in response many governmental bodies have recently eliminated fluoride from their water supplies.

To name just a few in our region that have done so since 2014: Snowmass, Montrose, and Albuquerque. Portland, Ore., eliminated it in 2013, as did the State of Israel, in 2014.

Over 90 percent of western European countries do not use fluoride in their water. Is this sounding like an issue that is well-settled to you?

I am uncertain about the trustworthiness of any of the studies out there, pro or con, so I prefer to use the precautionary principle here. If we can not be certain that fluoride in our water supply is only beneficial, then we certainly should not be forcing it on the entire populace, especially when there is a simple alternative to putting fluoride in our water.

Each of us can choose to use fluoridated toothpaste and/or mouthwash to accomplish the same result. Using fluoride topically, rather than systemically, would appear to be a safer choice.

Let’s put this to a vote! Please sign the petition!

Ron Margolis

Durango

Print PDF