USA - logic but will they listen?

Fluoride not beneficial
Bob Kopitzke

The Coloradoan recently published a series of letters stating that the National Research Council's report on fluoride is not relevant to Fort Collins. Not true, under the heading Fluoride in Drinking Water, Page 12, are two subheads natural and artificial: fluoridation of drinking water. Page 13, "this report does not evaluate nor make judgments about the benefits, safety or efficacy of artificial water fluoridation. That practice is reviewed only in terms of being a source of exposure to fluoride." Page 20, "The major dietary source of fluoride for most people in the United States is fluoridated municipal drinking water, including water consumed directly, food and beverages prepared from municipal drinking water and commercial beverages and foods originating from fluoridated municipalities."

The NRC report makes it clear that the maximum contaminate level goal would have to be 2 ppm to protect against just one health effect: severe dental fluorosis, pp 93-4. Accepting 2 ppm as the MCGL assumes that a child could develop severe dental fluorosis without being impacted in any other way. Pages 192-193 cite several studies showing a correlation of dental fluorosis with goiter and of increasing fluoride and goiter where fluoride concentration is less than 40 percent of Fort Collins water level at 1 ppm. It is preposterous to think that we can operate between a "beneficial" level of 1 ppm and a toxic level of 2 ppm without controlling how much water or food people consume. This absurd assumption flies in the face of the NRC exposure analysis.

Bob Kopitzke,
Fort Collins