"The main point is that the main point is the main point." T. Nguyen
I suggest that all developers be required to upgrade the water systems of all new residential and commercial properties, to ensure that only the purest water is supplied to these communities.
Surely, business is not so blind to #FAIL to recognize the penultimate principle of ALL: Maintain the value your capital supplies: HUMANITY.
WHOLLY WATER ® The Ultimate Drinking Water Appliance
99% Plus FLUORIDE REMOVAL AT 20,000 Gallons - Removal to 78,000 gallons...
"The magnitude of [fluoridation's]
effect is not large in absolute terms, is often not statistically
significant and may not be of clinical significance."
Fluoride Does Not Even Stop Cavities!!
on Fluoridation's Effectiveness:
children who live in areas of the U.S. where the water supplies
are fluoridated have tooth decay rates nearly identical with those
who live in nonfluoridated areas
- Hileman, B. (1989). New
Studies Cast Doubt on Fluoridation Benefits. Chemical & Engineering
News. May 8.
5, 2000: In a twenty-two page, response to the United States House
Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment, Chairman, Charles Fox,
Assistant Administrator USEPA, admitted that after more than five
decades of fluoridation at least tens of millions of Americans could
could be adversely affected by fluoridated drinking water. Fox wrote:
is in the process of developing medical fact sheets to provide
medical practitioners (doctors, nurses, dieticians, etc.) with
health data relative to drinking water contaminants that can be then
used in counseling patients. This work has just begun, and will
initially focus on the elderly, children and pregnant women. It will
later be expanded to cover other at-risk populations. In addition,
EPA has made it a requirement for public water systems to provide
their clients with health effects information on contaminants in
their water supply, including fluoride [Consumer Confidence Rule FR
Fox acknowledges the Toxicological Profile for Fluorides (US Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1993) page 112 statement:
"POPULATIONS THAT ARE UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE. Existing data
indicate that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible
to the effects of fluoride and its compounds. These populations
include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium
and vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems . .
. Poor nutrition increases the incidence and severity of dental
fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis."
statistics are of the 'at risk' populations compiled for the House
Committee on Science inquiry by the USEPA:
years and older population--52,000,000
C deficiency--27% of the population
deficiency--37% of the population
deficiency--44% of the population
the response to congressman Ken Calvert, the EPA also concedes that
fluorosilicic acid and fluorosilicates, the preferred chemicals used
to fluoridate drinking water are captured pollution waste products
from phosphate fertilizer industry.
safety testing has ever been done with the products.**
The addition of fluoride substances to the drinking water for the
purpose of water fluoridation are regulated by EPA as contaminants.
Calvert's Question 8: "How many individuals in the nation
does EPA estimate fall into the category depicted as “unusually
susceptible” in the Toxicological Profile for Fluorides,
Hydrogen Fluoride, and Fluorine, published by the Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry? What measures does EPA
recommend for these 'unusually susceptible'
individuals who live in fluoridated communities or communities whose
water contains fluoride at the MCL?"
tried to mitigate the clear warning of the Toxicological Profile:
1 below summarizes those populations that the ATSDR Toxicological
Profile (1993; Section 2.7) identifies as sensitive and includes data
on the prevalence in the United States of the underlying
physiological, nutritional, or age-related condition. It is important
to note that the population values in Table 1 are numbers of
individuals that fall in each category. There are no data to suggest
that these individuals as a group are, or would be, sensitive to
fluoride at the levels found in the environment. The demographic
information for cardiovascular disease and renal disorders in Table 1
was collected by the Office of Water as a component of an effort to
identify sensitive populations in the United States that might be
sensitive to specific chemicals by virtue of their chronic disease
state (O’Dey et al., 1998). Demographic data for the elderly
come from a recently completed study of water intakes by the Office
of Water (Jacobs et al., 2000). Prevalence values have been rounded
to the nearest million and were extrapolated from the survey
population to the U.S. population. Data on nutrient deficiencies are
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture 1994- 1996 Continuing Survey
of Food Intake by Individuals (USDA, 1998). The values given are the
percent of the population consuming less than 75% of the Recommended
Dietary Allowance for the nutrient in question."
he included the following table:
1991) Estimated Population
diverted the congressman by commenting: "Individuals that
fall in each of the categories listed in Table 1 have a number of
specific risk factors that impact their health status such as body
weight, diet, and life style (e.g. Smoking, alcohol consumption).
Advice on beneficial life style changes for each condition is best
provided by the medical community."
the implications for susceptible populations acknowledged in the 1993
Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, seven years on EPA has done
little to address them. Fox states:
is in the process of developing medical fact sheets to provide
medical practitioners (doctors, nurses, dietitians, etc.) with health
data relative to drinking water contaminants that can be then used in
counseling patients. This work has just begun, and will initially
focus on the elderly, children and pregnant women. It will later be
expanded to cover other at-risk populations. In addition, EPA has
made it a requirement for public water systems to provide their
clients with health effects information on contaminants in their
water supply, including fluoride [Consumer Confidence Rule FR
unaware of any urgency, Fox added:
public notification language for fluoride has recently been proposed
[FR 65(87): 25982-26049]. The new language suggests dental
consultation in situations where there is a risk for dental fluorosis
because the water provided by their drinking water system has
exceeded the Secondary MCL for fluoride. The implementation manual
for public notification is close to completion. In addition, please
refer to the answer to Question 11 and EPA advice regarding fluoride
exposure and infants."
Calvert's Question 9: "Do you interpret Section 101
(b)(4) of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1996 as requiring EPA to set
its MCL(G)s at a level that protects all persons, including sensitive
populations, such as infants, children, people who drink 4 or more
liters of water per day, people with allergies or hypersensitivity to
fluoride and people with renal disease?"
corrected the Congressman: "The Safe Drinking
Water Act of 1996 does not have a Section 101(b)(4). Section
1412(b)(4)(a) states that “Each maximum contaminant level goal
established under this subsection shall be set at the level at which
no known or anticipated adverse effects on the health of persons
occur and which allows an adequate margin of safety.'
required by the SDWA [Section 1458(a)(1)], EPA is collecting
information to identify groups within the general population with
increased sensitivity to contaminants such as infants, children, the
elderly, persons with allergies or hypersensitivity to chemicals.
Some of the data that we have collected in this process are cited in
the response to Question 8 above."
ShowingRead more at www.wholly-water.com
the EPA's apparent lack of urgency for the plight of susceptible
people, Fox added: "If the MCL/MCLG for fluoride
is selected for an in-depth evaluation as part of the six-year review
of drinking water regulations, additional data on sensitive
populations and their dose-response to fluoride will be collected and
EPA will publish and seek public comment on its findings as required
by the SDWA Section 1412(b)(3)(C)(i)(V)."