Posts Tagged ‘public’

See Also: My letter to the Trump Administration Re: EPAs Involvement in Water Fluoridation

By Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director, Fluoride Action Network

The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), along with a coalition of environmental and public health groups has filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to their denial of our petition under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) seeking a ban on water fluoridation.

We believe this lawsuit is an unprecedented opportunity to end the practice once and for all in the U.S., and potentially throughout the world, based on the well-documented neurotoxicity of fluoride. You may read the official complaint here. According to FAN’s attorney and adviser, Michael Connett:

“This case will present the first time a court will consider the neurotoxicity of fluoride and the question of whether fluoridation presents an unreasonable risk under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

And, in contrast to most other legal challenges of Agency actions, TSCA gives us the right to get the federal court to consider our evidence ‘de novo’ — meaning federal courts are to conduct their own independent review of the evidence without deference to the EPA’s judgment.”

Industry, legal and environmental observers following the EPA’s implementation of the new TSCA law have pointed out that a lawsuit1challenging the EPA’s denial of our petition would provide a test case for the agency’s interpretation that petitioners must provide a comprehensive analysis of all uses of a chemical in order to seek a restriction on a particular use.

Legal experts have suggested the EPA’s interpretation essentially makes the requirements for gaining Agency action using section 21 petitions impossible to meet, making the outcome significant for all U.S. residents and public health or environmental watchdog groups.

Lawsuit Background: EPA Served With Citizen’s Petition

On November 22, 2016, a coalition including FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Moms Against Fluoridation and several individual mothers, filed a petition calling on the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to the drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The petition includes more than 2,500 pages of scientific documentation detailing the risks of water fluoridation to human health.The full petition can be accessed here, a shorter eight-page summary here and our press release here.

We presented the FDA with a large body of human and animal evidence demonstrating that fluoride is a neurotoxin at levels now ingested by many U.S. children and vulnerable populations. We also presented the agency with evidence showing that fluoride has little benefit when swallowed and, accordingly, any risks from exposing people to fluoride chemicals in water are unnecessary.

We believe an impartial judge reviewing this evidence will agree that fluoridation poses an unreasonable risk. On February 27, 2017, the EPA published their response.2 In their decision, the EPA claimed:

“The petition has not set forth a scientifically defensible basis to conclude that any persons have suffered neurotoxic harm as a result of exposure to fluoride in the U.S. through the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to drinking water or otherwise from fluoride exposure in the U.S.”

As many independent scientists now recognize, fluoride is a neurotoxin.3 The question, therefore, is not if fluoride damages the brain, but at what dose. While EPA quibbles with the methodology of some of these studies, to dismiss and ignore these studies in their entirety for methodological imperfections is exceptionally cavalier, particularly given the consistency of the findings and the razor-thin margin between the doses causing harm in these studies and the doses that millions of Americans now receive.

EPA’s own Guidelines for Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment highlights the importance of having a robust margin between the doses of a chemical that cause neurotoxic effects and the doses that humans receive. FAN presented the EPA with over 180 studies showing that fluoride causes neurotoxic harm (e.g., reduced IQ), pointing out that many of these studies found harm at levels within the range, or precariously close to, the levels millions of American children now receive.

Typically, this would be a cause for major concern. But, unfortunately, the EPA has consistently shied away from applying the normal rules of risk assessment to fluoride — and it has unfortunately continued that tradition with its dismissal of our petition.

Fortunately, the TSCA statute provides citizens with the ability to challenge an EPA denial in federal court. For too long, EPA has let politics trump science on the fluoride issue (see examples). FAN welcomes having these issues considered by a federal court, where scientific evidence has a better chance of being weighed objectively.

To accompany our lawsuit, FAN is offering a new DVD and a comprehensive campaign flash drive package. The DVD features the video, “Fluoride and the Brain,” in which Michael Connett explains that fluoride’s ability to lower IQ in children is just the tip of an iceberg of over 300 animal and human studies that indicate that fluoride is neurotoxic.

We have also made a comprehensive collection of campaign and educational videos available on a single flash drive for a limited time. It also includes our EPA petition and supporting documentation. This is a must-have for every fluoride-free campaigner’s toolkit.4  Another must-have is the book “The Case Against Fluoride,” by environmental chemist and toxicologist Paul Connett, Ph.D., which contains a comprehensive science-based argument for the end to artificial water fluoridation.

Winning this lawsuit will require a full team effort, and we want you to feel a part of that team and a part of this moment in history. Please consider playing a larger role in this potentially fluoridation-ending lawsuit by making a tax-deductible contribution.

New Study Quantifies Fluoride’s Potential to Lower IQ in Children

Since submitting our citizen’s petition to the EPA, we have learned even more about the threat to the next generation. Some children in the U.S. may be consuming enough fluoridated water to reach doses of fluoride that have the potential to lower their IQ, according to a research team headed by William Hirzy, Ph.D., a former senior scientist at the EPA who specialized in risk assessment and published an important risk analysis in the journal Fluoride last year.5

Current federal guidelines encourage the addition of fluoride chemicals into water supplies to reach 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Hirzy followed EPA risk assessment guidelines to report: “The effect of fluoride on IQ is quite large, with a predicted mean 5 IQ point loss when going from a dose of 0.5 mg/F/day to 2.0 mg F/day.”

Many children in the U.S. commonly consume these levels of fluoride within this range from all sources (i.e., water, food, dental products, medicines and air pollution). Hirzy explains the significance of this study:

“The significance of this peer reviewed risk analysis is that it indicates there may be no actual safe level of exposure to fluoride. Groups of children with lower exposures to fluoride were compared with groups having higher exposures. Those with higher exposures performed more poorly on IQ tests than those with lower exposures.

One well-conducted Chinese study indicated that children exposed to 1.4 mg/day had their IQ lowered by 5 IQ points. Current average mean daily intakes among children in the United States are estimated by EPA to range from about 0.80 mg/day to 1.65 mg/day. Fluoride may be similar to lead and mercury in having no threshold below which exposures may be considered safe.”

Dr. Bill Osmunson, FAN’s interim director, noted that this risk analysis adds further weight to the petition submitted to the EPA by FAN and other groups in November to ban the addition of fluoride chemicals to drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act.

FAN’s Persistence Pays Off: US Government Funding Neurotoxicity Studies

FAN progress isn’t limited to the legal world. Our relentless effort to get the U.S. government to take fluoride’s neurotoxicity seriously is also beginning to pay off in other ways. For many years, American regulatory and research agencies have failed to finance studies seeking to reproduce the many studies undertaken abroad that have found harm to the brain (over 300).

When toxicologist and pharmacologist Phyllis Mullenix, et al., published their groundbreaking animal study6 on fluoride and animal behavior in 1995, she was fired from her position as chair of the toxicology department at the Forsythe Dental Center. That sent a chilling message to U.S. researchers — research on fluoride toxicity is a “no-go” area. But that is changing. Now, with the U.S. government funding several important toxicology studies, this should encourage other Western researchers to get involved:

There is a new National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded fluoride/brain study.7 Our Canadian friends are extremely excited by this research funding to Christine Till and Ashley Malin, the co-authors of the important study that found a correlation between fluoridation and increased ADHD rates in the U.S.8 This could definitely be one of the most important developments in water fluoridation to date.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) is in the process of completing a rodent study using low levels of fluoride exposure. However, we have concerns over the consultation process NTP had prior to when this study was undertaken (see “Vigilance Still Needed” at end of this article).

Dr. Philippe Grandjean, Harvard School of Public Health, is leading an ongoing study of fluoride and intelligence among a group of schoolchildren in China. Grandjean published the preliminary results of this study in the January-February 2015 issue of Neurotoxicology & Teratology.9

A National Institute of Environmental Health (NIEHS)-funded human epidemiological study titled “Prenatal and Childhood Exposure to Fluoride and Neurodevelopment” is investigating the relationship between fluoride and IQ among a cohort of children in Mexico. A summary of the study10 is available online.

An NIEHS-funded animal study, “Effects of Fluoride on Behavior in Genetically Diverse Mouse Models,” is investigating fluoride’s effects on behavior and whether these effects differ based on the genetic strain of the mouse. The principal investigator of the study is Dr. Pamela Den Besten. A summary of her study11 is available online.

The NIH is funding a study investigating the impact of fluoride on the timing of puberty among children in Mexico. This study is pertinent to the assessment of fluoride’s impact on the pineal gland’s regulation of melatonin. The preliminary results of the study were presented at the 2014 Independent School Entrance Examination ISEE conference and can be accessed online.12

Though not funded by the U.S. government, Jaqueline Calderón Hernandez, Ph.D., Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Mexico, is currently working with Diana Rocha-Amador, Ph.D., on three studies on fluoride neurotoxicity:

1.An examination of the cognitive effects from fluoride in drinking water

2.Estimating the global burden of disease of mild mental retardation associated with environmental fluoride exposure

3.Investigating the impact of in utero exposure to fluoride (via drinking water) on cognitive development delay in children

Rocha-Amador is also examining the impact of fluoride on thyroid hormone levels in pregnant women, and published a fluoride/IQ study in 2007.13

Vigilance Still Needed

We still have to be vigilant to make sure that those determined to protect the fluoridation program don’t skew the results. For example, it is worrying that the NTP specified that an animal study should be conducted at 0.7 ppm — which is a ridiculous provision for an animal study on fluoride. For example, it is well-known that rats need a much higher dose of fluoride in their water to reach the same plasma levels in humans.

Moreover, it is standard practice in toxicology to use much higher doses in animals to tease out effects. To conduct experiments on animals at expected human doses would require a huge number of animals, which would be cost prohibitive. These studies also raise a significant question for those who continue to promote fluoridation in local communities and legislatures around the world.

“What primary scientific studies (not bogus reviews conducted by pro-fluoridation agencies) can you cite that give you the confidence to ignore or dismiss the evidence that fluoride damages the brain as documented in over 300 animal and human studies (including 50 IQ studies)?”

As shown by its support for these new neurotoxicity studies, our own government has acknowledged the risk fluoride poses to our children. If proponents cannot provide an adequate scientific answer to this question, then fluoridation should be halted immediately, and should under no circumstances be initiated.

National Fluoridation Stats Show Tipping Point Has Been Reached

Progress is also being made on the political front. U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) fluoridation statistics for the U.S. have been released for 2014,14 and they show exactly why the fluoridation lobby has been pouring more money and resources into promoting the practice and fighting our efforts: WE ARE WINNING!

For the first time in nearly 40 years, the percentage of the U.S. population served by community water systems receiving fluoridated water decreased, from 74.6 percent to 74.4 percent. The percentage of the U.S. population receiving optimally fluoridated water (natural and artificial) also decreased, from 67.1 percent to 66.3 percent. Also decreasing:

  • The number of water systems providing fluoridated water (natural or artificial)
  • The number of water systems adding fluoride
  • The number of water systems providing naturally “optimal fluoride” levels

Momentum Continues to Build Thanks to Citizens Like You

More than 460 communities throughout the world have ended existing fluoridation programs or rejected new efforts to fluoridate either by council vote or citizen referendum since 1990. Since January 2016 alone, we’ve confirmed that at least 33 communities with nearly a million collective residents voted to end fluoridation, bringing the number of victories since 2010 to at least 225 communities,15 representing approximately 6.5 million people.

Most of these victories were the result of citizens organizing local campaigns and voicing their opposition to public officials, with many working in coordination with FAN or using our materials to educate their neighbors and local decision makers about the serious health risks associated with the practice. Some of the latest victories in the U.S. and abroad include:16

LIVE STREAM HERE: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/la-batchelor

or CALL IN:646-929-0130

Announcement: I have been invited for an interview with L.A. Batchelor, a local radio show / podcast host to continue discussion around public water Fluoridation.

Tune in 6pm EST or revisit the 4/20/2017 Episode to hear me break down the criminal water fluoridation program and it’s machinations in the Triangle NC area.

On April 4th and April 6th fellow anti-fluoride activist Daria Barazandeh appeared on L.A.’s show to discuss the public health concerns and total  intransigence of the OWASA board.  I will bring a different perspective and expand upon Daria’s previous elaborations around the difficulties working with the various governmental bureaucracies and how they manifest the propaganda to continue doing business as usual.

 

By Corey Sturmer

In the wake of a water utility disaster which involved the Orange Water and Sewer Authority “accidentally” over-fluoridating the public water supply, OWASA is holding a series of meetings to discuss the emergency and hear from concerned citizens regarding the incident. At the first public comment section which took place February 9, the majority of citizens who took time to speak focused narrowly on OWASA’s longstanding public water fluoridation policy and demanded it’s immediate cessation. OWASA had been warned about the dangers as far back as 2012, but persisted in their march to fluoridate leading up to the disaster. OWASA has actually already suspended the public water fluoridation program after the ‘accident’ but then brought in an alleged “Independent Consultant” who was tasked with delivering a report on the infrastructure failures and ways to improve. The consultant is CH2M Hill, which is a multi-billion dollar government trough company with negative revenue who also happens to have a conflict of interest in this matter since they contract with the very same fertilizer companies who produce and sell fluoride across the United States. Not surprisingly, CH2M Hill is being even less critical of the fluoridation policy than OWASA and it seems apparent that the Town of Chapel Hill will continue the policy if the citizens don’t speak up. In the 2nd public comment meeting on this topic, OWASA accomplished the following things;

1) Admitted that Fluoride causes leaching from lead pipes / joints / fixtures

2) Admitted that OWASA is not mandated to fluoridate

3) Admitted by omission that OWASA customers never voted to fluoridate

4) Admitted that there is no barrier between the fluoridation clearwell and the distribution system

5) Admitted that they will allow over-fluoridation in the future as a cost-benefit to prevent having to cut off the water

6) Voted unanimously against allowing the OWASA customers to have a public referendum on public water fluoridation. As you can see, OWASA is a corrupted and compromised institution that does not have the public’s best interest at heart.

You can contact the OWASA Board here: http://www.owasa.org/board-of-directors

And support our efforts here: https://www.gofundme.com/DurhamAgains…http://www.durhamagainstfluoride.com

In Response to the recent over-fluoridation of the community water supply, the citizens make their voices HEARD!

OWASA is extremely upset and disturbed by the awakening public who has forced their hand in revisiting this longstanding practice.  They are doing all they can to perform damage control and avoid negligence in this costly and dangerous disaster but given the fact that we have notified them as early as 2012, they are in an extremely compromised position!

Disclaimer: This video is not original material, copyright resides with the original producer(s), this is posted under public commons and because I am one of those featured in the segment.

Relevant: http://abc11.com/health/owasa-braces-for-flood-of-complaints-after-water-crisis/1745141/

Background:

Recently the local water board who manages Orange County’s public water utility set off a series of infrastructure failures which lead to the depletion of the water supply and a brief “No Drink Order.”

The genesis of the issue was from an accidental fluoride “overfeed” which required the OWASA organization to shut down the water treatment plant and import supplies from a neighboring city.  This most likely resulted in a water main burst shortly thereafter that exacerbated the problem and caused a full system shutdown.  Businesses were expecting a busy weekend and lost thousands of dollars.

As a leitmotif of this blog, this unfortunate disaster raises opportunity to ask the question once more; so why is the city medicating the water supply with a highly corrosive and highly neuro-toxic industrial byproduct of the fertilizer and aluminum industry to begin with?   In view of the situation in Chapel Hill, nobody can argue that it is a fiscally responsible or effective methodology to solve a social medical problem like cavities!

The OWASA board has been medicating the water supply with hydrofluorosilicic acid for many decades now, and the chemicals used have proven capacities to corrode metals and concrete over time.[1][2]  This not only threatens our own biological well-being but is principally involved on multiple levels in making the water disaster.  This is what OWASA and the City Council would like the public NOT to focus on.

There is dated video evidence on this very website of local activists raising this and many other ethical / legal problems with community water fluoridation to the OWASA board, emphatically demanding a cessation of this perilous policy.  Now that there has been a legitimate disaster, a lot of public attention, and increased distrust of the water ‘authorities’, OWASA may now be in an area of possible negligence and commercial liability.

To exacerbate and confuse the issue as it unfolded, the series of news releases published by OWASA to communicate the ongoing guidance, was riddled with contradictions and dubious assurances of water safety.

For demonstration sake, just look at the initial guidance after the fluoride overfeed incident was made public:

OWASA temporarily receiving drinking water from City of Durham; water continues to be safe to drink

However, customers may notice some discoloration in water. The discoloration, which results from stirring up sediment in water pipes, **does not make the water unsafe ** –but it should not be used for laundry, cooking, drinking, etc. —

When asked for test results to verify the claim that the supply was not contaminated with Fluoride or worse, the county health director only shared a bacteria and chlorine reading (bacteria-results-2-6-17)

The OWASA board has temporarily stopped their community water fluoridation program pending a 3rd party review of the incident.   They should stop while they are ahead and have the water running still.

Rest assured we will be reorienting the discussion to the real cause of the problem and trying to ensure the people respond accordingly and finally end the community water fluoridation scourge in this area.  Given the social importance of the triangle to the central fluoridation scheme, a reversal in OWASA-land would have a huge psychological impact to the movement against government medical intervention nationally.

The Board meeting will begin at 6 p.m. Thursday in the Council Chamber at the Chapel Hill Town Hall, 405 Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Chapel Hill.

Members of the public will have up to four minutes per person to comment at the meeting. They may also send comments in advance to info@owasa.org or to Andrea Orbich, Clerk to the Board, 400 Jones Ferry Road, Carrboro, NC 27510.

[1] North Carolina Study Concluding that chlorine (CL) or chloramines (CA) with fluosilicic acid (FSA) or sodium fluoride (NaF). CL is known to corrode brass, releasing lead from plumbing devices.

Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17697714

_________________________________________________________

[2]The effect of fluoride on corrosion of reinforcing steel in alkaline solutions

Link: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010938X94900159
__________________________________________________________

[3]Fluoride in Water Worsened Flint Water Crisis – http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fluoride-in-water-worsens-us-lead-crisis-300219061.html

[4]Fluoride Spill in Rock Island Illinois burns through concrete – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szL2Ofzvpcs

[5]Corey Visits Durham Fluoride Station, Superintendent says that it is “Highly Corrosive”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwAJJm1w8po

[6]Lead-in and recording of Kevin Bucholtz from Department of Health and Human Services admitting in 2012 that hydrofluorosilicic acid leaches lead from the pipe, taken from Documentary we made chronicling our protest attempts starting at 12 minutes 51 Seconds: https://youtu.be/ZabGVxv96qI?t=12m51s

Dear President Elect Donald J Trump, the Trump family and the new Trump administration,

Congratulations on your momentous landslide victory in the 2016 presidential election.  Against all odds your team has out-maneuvered the most powerful and corrupt political and media establishment which has had heretofore an iron grip on the minds of the public.  You experienced first hand the collusion, dirty tricks and uniformity of action against a rising populist sentiment in America.

You intimately witnessed how the DC propaganda machine is able to manipulate large swaths of the electorate to believe a false narrative, and I’m sure you have been frustrated by the gullibility of many voters to do so.

Now that you have won the election battle I note that you have quickly begun the transition process and all the ensuing machinations of “assuming office.”  Before you know it, your cabinet positions will be filled and you will have to set about fulfilling your campaign promises, which to use your own words is to “make America Great again.”

Surely I know that every brand of politico, lobbyist, industrialist and well meaning citizen are pitching their ideas to you and your team – lord knows there is a lengthy list of things to do in order to begin to reverse course, and everyone seems to have their own ideas about how best to achieve that.   From monetary to foreign policy, it is all a great big beautiful mess and you have taken on the unenviable role of trying to fix it.

Easier said than done, I know!

But the key question is, how does one prioritize which issue to tackle first? 

As a builder you know well that in any new construction the most important step is to construct a solid foundation first and foremost.  The rest of the process is only made possible by having a level and properly supported foundation.  In cases of renovation, sometimes you must repair the foundation in order to revive a property that has fallen into disrepair.

Similarly, the outward manifestation of society’s behavioral ethics, intellectual achievement and moral direction as a whole is built upon the foundation of our “group intelligence quotient” which is simply the average intelligence quotient of a civilization’s individual constituents.

One should expect that the more enlightened a society is, the more ethical and constructive they will be.

In business and in life I am sure you have discovered yourself that low IQ is directly related to project delays, corruption, back stabbing, financial mishandling, mistakes, confusion, unnecessary aggression, dishonor and every other negative attribute of human being.  This is self evident because any enlightened individual or society with a high intelligence would realize the diminishing returns of such behavior patterns and immediately reorient them for their own self interest.

In light of this revelation, it becomes apparent that your success depends less on your own personal persuasiveness, cunning or intelligence but much more heavily on the reciprocal intelligence level of the rest of the individuals who constitute the civilization you are attempting to uplift.

Consequently in order to effectively and comprehensively deal with such myriad political quandaries one must first address the foundational problems of society (Group IQ), before attempting to fix any of the dependent structures for them to have proper and sustainable support.

Otherwise, the incalcitrant minds of a dumbed down electorate will not be able to properly perceive the truth and will revert back to debased, unengaged, selfish and programmed behavior patterns.  Under such psychological conditions the public will still be easy for the corporate media to manipulate and it will be difficult at best to get anything of great magnitude done.

Luckily there is a feasible, remarkably fast and effective way for a new administration such as your own to boost America’s group intelligence from the top-down, which will greatly open the hearts and minds of everyone involved and subsequently accelerate the collective intellectual and emotional evolution needed for you to properly address the major policy issues which have come to characterize American apathy, degeneracy and serfdom in the last few decades.

Coincidentally such a singular fix easily fits into your existing contract with the American voter, under Section 2.7:

SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure.

Source: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/contract/

While there are many issues with our water supply and other environmental infrastructure perhaps the most influential on the group IQ of our nation is the well known state health policy of “Public water Fluoridation.”

Over 70% of American municipalities make a regular practice of spending millions of dollars purchasing untested, hazardous waste byproducts of the fertilizer industry and distributing the IQ reducing agent through their public water supply. (See: Harvard study Impact of Fluoride on Neurological Development in Children)

Consequently, America has seen an average intelligence quotient stunted over the same period of time it should have been growing due to improved living standards, which is undoubtedly influenced by this persistent and largely unobstructed policy. (See: Are we becoming more STUPID?)

The amount of value this one policy has destroyed is impossible to evaluate, because it has unquestionably prevented significant economic production including inventions, innovations and interpersonal acumen that we can only imagine but not measure in real terms.

Perhaps more concerning than the deleterious effect of water fluoridation on our average intelligence is the well known problems it causes with our thyroid health.  The purpose of your thyroid gland is to make, store, and release thyroid hormones into your blood. These hormones, which are also referred to as T3 (liothyronine) and T4 (levothyroxine), affect almost every cell in your body, and help control your body’s functions (including emotions, reproduction, and intelligence!).

We all know how unbalanced hormones can make people act crazy, and this is precisely what is happening when our society ingests tap water on a regular basis that is laced with the halogen Fluoride.  The thyroid absorbs the fluoride, instead of the iodine it needs and is consequently prohibited from serving it’s proper function in the biology of our people. (See: Clinical Studies on Fluoride’s effect on the Thyroid)

Despite the unfortunate fact that most people are still living under the self interested mantra of the state dental lobby that “Water fluoridation is a significant public health achievement,” many of them are nevertheless acutely aware that our water infrastructure is not altogether safe – with the Flint lead crisis and other recent controversies the public temperament towards the public water authorities has never been more open to change.

Fortunately, we can capitalize on the fact that public water fluoridation and overexposure to lead are in fact closely related since the addition of fluorosilicates to the city water infrastructure is admittedly known to have a corrosive effects on brass joints that results in the leeching of lead into the tap water and blood stream of America (See: Effects of fluoridation and disinfection agent combinations on lead leaching from leaded-brass parts.)

With this one issue a Trump administration has the opportunity to do immense foundational repair to the underlying intellectual and bio-physiological deficits which make enlightened thought patterns a scarcity in the halls of government and elsewhere.  In my estimation there isn’t a single issue that could more effectively change the overall psychological ether in this country than reversing this long standing attack on the literal operating system of the American people.

Reversing public water fluoridation would immediately result in a softening of our hearts and a sharpening of our minds which would accelerate our opening to enlightened transcendental ideas that can give birth to a new epoch of political, socio-economic and legal reforms.

Here are my specific recommendations on how a Trump administration could maximize their use of the office to influence this situation and change the overall calculus with respect to the state sacrament of public water fluoridation.

  1. Use of the Bully Pulpit: Hold a  press conference at the White House and outline the legal, financial, moral, and scientific reasons why the people should demand their municipalities change the policy.
  2. Leverage the Appointee Power of the POTUS seat; recommend the senate approve a new commissioner of the FDA who will enforce existing drug laws which prohibit the prescription of a medical agents without the proper medical license and informed consent.

The FDA’s definition of a Drug/Medication is; “articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease”  [FD&C Act, sec. 201(g)(1)].  The only stated purpose of public water fluoridation is to PREVENT tooth decay, which is considered a disease of the tooth. Under current FDA law, city council members are therefore criminally liable for continuing public water fluoridation, but no court will ever hear the case because they too are inculcated by the effective fluoridation propaganda of the dental lobbies and misguided state health representatives – the FDA commissioner should put all participating municipalities on notice to come into compliance with the existing FDA laws or face commercial liability for any damages that can be argued in a court.  When activist law firms see the opening to make money via class action lawsuits that hold weight, the city councils will come into compliance very quickly.

3. Use the Health and Human Service Apparatus: In this video presentation I cover the little known history of our Department of Health and Human Service agency which has its roots in a secret biological weapon research arm of the Department of War.  It was later in the 1950’s that the HHS apparatus began to work with renown propagandist Edward Bernays and the Democratic Rockefeller operative and proginitor of the Research Triangle Park Oscar Ewing to implement a nation wide PR campaign that lead to a national public fluoridation policy.  Use your appointee power and executive action to either cut funding to the HHS or embed citizen patriots there who understand the historical role the HHS has had in attacking American health so that they can use the levers of power to turn the spigots off.

4. Re-examine the Environmental Protection Agency’s role in the perpetuation of the public water fluoridation scheme.  In my two part interview with long time EPA toxicologist and fluoride activist William Hirzy, who blew the whistle and testified before congress on this issue in the early 2000s, he explains how the EPA is responsible for covering up the health dangers in order to maintain the status quo.  In my personal experience I have found some cities will rely on the EPA’s allowable environmental fluoride concentration level to suggest that the amount the city adds to the water is therefore safe, but when confronted with scientific evidence to the contrary the EPA says that they don’t regulate municipal water supplies. We need to stop the onion of bureaucracy and inter-agency collusion which leads to a perpetuation of our most pressing problems.

Mr. Trump, if you are for real, then please give consideration to taking these 4 straightforward recommendations to make a monolithic change that will have the largest return on investment of any single tenant in your 100 Day contract with voters.

Thank you for your time,

Corey Sturmer

http://www.durhamagainstfluoride.com

Dear Readers,

Last month I was contacted by a fellow at the Emerging Leaders in Science and Society organization and was cordially invited to discuss the state of the public drinking water in the United States. 

Justin Lana (LinkedIn) further elaborated over a series of emails that he had stumbled upon my anti-fluoride exploits and would value my input for a water quality related project that he is working on at ELISS.  You can read much more about this in our correspondence below. 

What piqued my interest in participation and eventually lead to an hour long discussion is that Justin described the goalpost for the ELISS project being some sort of presentation to members of our water regulatory apparatus in Washington.    While I had no hope that this meeting would be any kind of silver bullet for the fluoride issue I felt Justin was open minded and could potentially influence others in this area. After some scheduling, I eventually agreed to meet Justin for lunch at a nearby Indian restaurant to candidly discuss the “current state” issues from my perspective.

For my own protection and journalistic discipline I will sometimes utilize recording devices when traveling or publicly discussing issues of national import, however do not always publish what is captured.  In this case, I felt compelled to admit after the fact that I had recorded almost our entire conversation without his knowledge and also requested publication rights.  I felt the content of the discussion was valuable enough to deserve it’s own article and what you see here is the result.

While initially hesitant, Justin revisited our discussion and bravely gave me the green light so long as I made some important disclaimers.  So that I can never be accused of skewing anyone else’s words, I am also sharing a truncated series of our email exchanges which give the most comprehensive background concerning this situation.  I hope you enjoy!

Mr. Sturmer,

I’m writing to see if you would be willing to meet with me regarding a project that I am currently apart of Drinking Water in the United States: how do we ensure a safe, sustainable, and affordable future in our communities.

I’m working on this project as part of the Emerging Leaders in Science & Society (ELISS) fellowship program. In short, ELISS is a service leadership program for graduate students hosted by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

Duke is one of five partner campuses across the USA participating for 2016. More about ELISS can be found at http://www.elissfellows.org or in the attached program flyer.

ELISS2016_H2Oflyer

Our group will be presenting an overview of Triangle specific drinking water issues to individuals involved in federal water policy in Washington D.C. in June.

Next October we will be holding a local forum to discuss the same issue and we will return to DC in December 2016 to present to national stakeholders.

Our team is divided into various roles: health, environment, economic and society.

Given your view points on fluoride and water, and active role you’ve taken in this fight and against the City of Durham, I believe that your knowledge and the voices you represent would be incredibly valuable to our project.

I would be happy to buy you coffee at a location of your choosing or to come by your office for a meeting.

If you would be willing to meet, please let me know your general availability and a convenient location to meet.

Generally I’m free Mondays (1:00 – 5), Wednesdays (12:30 – 4) and Friday (all day).

I look forward to hearing back from you. Please don’t hesitate to write or call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Justin Lana

__________________

Hi Justin,

Next monday afternoon would probably work.

I read the pamphlet and browsed the website…Before we meet however could you help me understand what you’re looking to accomplish with the meeting? My website is a good resource of information concerning my viewpoints on the issue so I’m just wondering the purpose…

Either way, let me know some time slots that work for you…noon is best for me but if that isn’t doable I can try to make it work.

Thanks,

Corey

___________________

Hi Corey,

Monday at noon works great for me. Just let me know where, and I’ll make sure I’m there on time.

I appreciate you taking the time to read over our site and our pamphlet. To answer you question: My goal for the meeting is to speak with a concerned citizen who has had experience taking up issues with the city and garnering support for your idea. I will be sure to go over all the fluoride information provided on the website before we meet. And while I’m sure I’ll have questions pertaining to the fluoride issue, I really want to learn more about your efforts involved in fighting this issues (roadblocks, avenues of support, etc.)…to learn more about what it takes to make change and where you see your efforts leading.

I hope that makes sense. If not, please let me know.
Looking forward to the meeting!

Justin

Justin T. Lana, MSc-Global Health
PhD Student, Environment
Duke University – Nicholas School of the Environment

__________________

Hi Justin,

Ok, that sounds fine. You might be surprised at the information I have to share so hopefully you come prepared for that!

Why don’t we meet at ————————— which you can look up on Google maps, it’s not far from my office.

Thanks for having open ears,

Corey

__________________

11:30 sounds great.

I will see you then!
Really looking forward to it.
________________________
Hi Justin,
Thank you for the lunch on Monday. I really enjoyed our discussion & hope you got a lot out of it.
I wanted to follow up on a couple items that I mentioned & thought you might find useful in your efforts.

1) I mentioned a WTVD news report that features me and my efforts, very fair presentment of the issue:

2) Public Health Board Meeting ended with me thrown out by a deputy sheriff –

3) Below is an email thread with one of your Duke peers which never amounted to much…but reminded me of the “forum” you mentioned as one of the possibilities with your ELISS work.
Last but not least I wanted to make you aware that I made an audio recording of our discussion on Monday.  This is something I habitually do as a journalistic practice when I give interviews or meet with people from the media for my own legal and personal protection.   I did not inform you of this at the time because I feel that the content and character of discourse changes drastically when an individual is aware that they are being recorded, and I did not want to contaminate our interaction.
I am letting you know this now because I listened to the audio recording on my way to work this morning & felt that it would be a highly valuable contribution to the fluoridation discussion if it were made available online.  Out of courtesy I wanted to know what are your thoughts about me publishing the recording accompanied by an article about our discussion?
Please let me know.
Thanks,
Corey
_____________________

Hi Corey,

Thanks for the email. I’m glad that you found the time to meet with me. As I mentioned on Monday, I knew your perspective would be much different than what I’ve encountered so far.
I will check out these links shortly (I’m finishing up with finals this week). I’ve read through your “conversation” with Jennifer Alspach, it’s unfortunate that nothing worked out. I’m not sure who she is or what group she was with, but it sure would have been interesting to see an actual debate take place over the issue of fluoridation.
Corey, I appreciate your informing me that our conversation was recorded; however, I don’t feel comfortable with it shared publicly at this time.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I hope you have a great time in S. Africa and the UAE. I will keep you posted on what I learn moving forward, our local forum, etc.
Thank you
Justin
_____________________

Hi Justin,

I forgot to add the video of me attending the water plant. The superintendent actually gave me a tour of the whole plant but the only piece I was interested in for my purposes was the fluoridation facility.  As mentioned he says casually that it is highly corrosive.

Corey visit Fluoridation Station:

Fluoride Spill in Illinois eats through concrete:

While I’m disappointed that you aren’t comfortable with the publication of our discussion I understand and will respect that.  I want to provide you an opportunity to revisit our discussion in case this gives you reason to change your mind. I know you’re busy but I think this is highly valuable and would be good for the public to consume. You can find the recording at the link below.

[Deleted]

I look forward to hearing about future updates on your work.

Take good care,

Corey

Hi Justin,

How are things going with your project @ ELISS? Did you get a chance to see any of my follow up items?  I was thinking about you when I was out of the country, because I noticed all the bottled water where I was had a detailed label spelling out the parts per million for several different minerals/metals and it reminded me of our discussion.

I have been playing catch up all week since I got back from South Africa & UAE. I hope you’ve been doing well.

_________________

Hi Corey,

Thank you for reaching out. I have also been out of the country (Panama) and have just started to get caught up with my work and ELISS related projects.

It was so great to get away; but coming back into ten days of disconnect from email/work is a little daunting (and I hope excuses my slow response).

ELISS is going well. We have about three weeks before our mid-year meeting in DC. I am not sure if I explained this earlier, but we’ve essentially been “scoping” drinking water issues since January. At our meeting in DC, we’ll meet with other campuses and decide what topic/issue(s)/etc. that we should focus on. I’m looking forward to hearing what the other campuses have to say about their communities as well as getting a little more direction on where we are headed.

As far as our previous discussion, I’ve gotten through the links and spent the last hour listening to our discussion. I have no problem with you posting it online, and you can keep my name attached to it if you like, but I do ask that you provide a little context in the description of where you post it. Namely 1) I’m not a water scholar or expert 2) that this was meant to be a discussion and not a formal interview 3) i was unaware of the recording during our discussion but have since agreed to its posting.

Corey, I look forward to keeping you in the loop. Keep in mind that I’ll be in the Peruvian Amazon for about ten weeks this summer, so if you don’t hear anything it doesn’t mean that I’ve forgotten about you; its just that I’m out of the loop myself or without email.

Thank you,

Justin

Justin T. Lana, MSc-Global Health
PhD Student, Environment
Duke University – Nicholas School of the Environment