USA - Letter: Fluoride supporters are the real extremists

To the editor:

When I first heard about Cape Ann residents opposing fluoridation, I admit I thought they were a bit extreme. I “knew” fluoride was good for teeth because my dentist and all those toothpaste commercials have been saying so for decades. And isn’t fluoridation endorsed by the CDC? Then, since I’m a data geek, I started looking at the data. I thought that would provide proof. It was like Alice Through the Looking Glass. Nothing made sense. The data has confirmed that any benefit from fluoride is from topical use, not from drinking it. Drinking it has been proven to damage teeth in 58 percent of non-white and 36 percent of white children. Every few months, there is another study proving that there are more health problems in fluoridated communities, from doubling the rates of low thyroid to thousands more children with diagnosed hyperactivity.

Then I started talking to people living in Gloucester and Rockport. I’ve spoken to people with kidney disease and autoimmune diseases. They’ve told me fluoride worsens their health and they take great pains to avoid city water as well as fluoridated toothpaste. And again, the science from this century confirms what they are telling me. Even the CDC admits that a percentage of the population could have ill effects from fluoridation. That’s when I realized that fluoridation should not be approached as either a scientific or political issue. It’s a matter of ethics. It is ethically unconscionable to add something to the municipal water that worsens the health of between 15 and 50 percent of the population. Anyone who supports fluoridation is the extremist, and those opposing fluoridation are to be commended for their courage in standing up to an organized special interest group. I urge Gloucester citizens to do the only moral thing on election day. Vote NO fluoridation.

Kirstin Elaine Martin

Gloucester