In contrast to the Aug. 9 editorial in the Watertown Daily Times titled “Chew on this: Potsdam should continue adding fluoride to its water supply”: The authors have regurgitated the standard pro-fluoridation mantra and is seemingly not interested in conducting their own research.
Concerning adding sodium fluoride as a more expensive alternative option “or using a different technique known as a sodium fluoride saturation system. The latter would be the most expensive option but would ensure lower maintenance costs and less acute health impacts. Also, with the new technique, less vapor would escape, thus requiring fewer repairs.”
Note: Potsdam uses hydrofluorosilicic acid identified as a neurotoxin and a waste byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry.
The more expensive alternative sodium fluoride may be even more expensive in the long run as sodium fluoride from China clogged up the pipes in a water district, which caused Amesbury, Mass., to cease fluoridation in 2011.
According to Boston.com: “Amesbury residents voted to eliminate the city’s water fluoridation program. The service began more than 40 years ago but has been discontinued since 2009 after growing concerns about the clogging and about the inability to measure just how much fluoride officials were adding into the drinking water” (http://wdt.me/maVNRm).
Stating further: “The vote came just weeks before Amesbury will unveil its newly renovated, $16 million water filtration plant. [Amesbury Mayor Thatcher Kezer III] said one of the main reasons for the vote was to gauge residents’ interest in retrofitting the upgraded plant to distribute liquefied fluoride. That retrofit would cost $250,000, said Kezer, but is unlikely to happen now given the vote results.”
Another item of interest concerning sodium fluoride local officials should consider is this from DrBicuspid.com: “If the U.S. government follows through on a threat to double tariffs on Chinese goods, China will retaliate by imposing tariffs on $60 billion worth of U.S. products, including several dental products, the Chinese government announced on Aug. 3” (http://wdt.me/DeV26V).
China is preparing to add duties ranging from 5 percent to 25 percent on more than 5,000 U.S. goods. Both professional and personal oral health care items from the United States are on China’s tariff list, including toothpaste, toothbrushes, floss, mouthwash and sodium fluoride at 20 percent duty.
Finally, here is a question for our village of Potsdam officials as well as our public health officials. According to the referenced “engineer study,” there are “less acute health impacts.” What are those less acute health impacts?
Dean Laubscher
Potsdam
*Original letter online at http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/opinion/potsdam-needs-to-consider-facts-on-fluoride-20180821
Print 
PDF