In response to the letter written by Dr. Bob Russell (DDS, MPH) to the Press-Citizen and Daily Iowan on the continued advocacy of Iowa’s water fluoridation program, Iowans For an End to Water Fluoridation have invited him to attend a locally televised public debate on the issue in Iowa City. The Iowa City Council has added fluoridation of the city’s water as a topic on their work session.

Our organization is seeking reassurance and guarantees from our public health officials and our council members as to the safety and the ethics of this practice. If Russell agrees to openly discuss this issue, our group will make a good faith effort to employ an impartial moderator and a format agreeable to both parties.

We have posted 20 questions on our Web site that we would like addressed by Russell and the Iowa City Council. I hope Russell accepts and takes this opportunity to educate Iowans. There are questions that need to be answered by our public health officials if water fluoridation is to continue. If anyone else is curious about our local water fluoridation polices and statistics, they can find out more on our Web site, http://justwaterplease.com/

– END –

The 20 Questions as posted on the Just Water Please website

1. What is the difference between the inorganic sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid) we add to our water and natural calcium fluoride that occurs in the earth’s crust?

2. How toxic is the compound sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid) in it’s concentrated form and where does it come from?

3. Who is prescribing sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid) to our population?

4. Do these persons have any medical or pharmacy training?

5. What authority do they have to do this and by whom was the authority given to them?

6. Has the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ever approved any fluoride product designed for ingestion as safe or effective?

7. Are people’s human rights or constitutional rights being violated if they don’t want to participate in drinking sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid)?

8. If a segment of the population does not want to ingest sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid) and can not afford the money to buy bottled non-fluoridated water is the city willing to do anything for them?

9. Can I be guaranteed in writing that my family will suffer no negative health effects from fluoridated water (including fluorosis) and if so who would be responsible for damages if it was determined that people have suffered adverse health effects?

10. If a person lives a vigorous lifestyle and consumes several times the amount of water of an average person is their health at risk?

11. Since much of the United State’s processed food supply, fruits, and vegetables has sodium flouride (fluorosilicic acid) in it or on it do we still need to add more to our water?

12. How can I tell how much sodium fluoride (fluorosilic acid) I’m taking in on a daily basis through food and water?

13. Will I receive a cumulative negative effect on my health if I consume sodium fluoride (fluorosilicic acid) for several years?

14. Since almost all of the civilized world has rejected or stopped water fluoridation why does the United States insist on continuing and why does it aggressively advocate and market the practice?

15. Should our nation be concerned about a correlation between the growing number of diseases and health afflictions ( diabetes, kidney disease, thyroid problems, autism, Alzheimer’s, ADD) and industrial pollutants such as fluoride?

16. Is the State of Iowa harming it’s waterways by adding over 3.5 million pounds of fluorisilicic acid per year to it’s water supply?

17. If one or fluoride’s primary functions is to inhibit bacteria topically does it make sense to drink it?

18. Should we really be taking advice from an association of dentists to put a toxic by-product into our water supply?

19. Since the #1 rule of medicine is first do no harm should we not be consulting with doctors of toxicology as to the safety of this practice?

20. Is it possible that the portion of the scientific community that advocates water fluoridation would not want to reverse itself due to embarrassment, vanity, potential law suits, or loss of government/corporate research funding?

Print PDF