On Tuesday, June 4th, 2002 RCSDW turned in over 6,700 signatures of registered voters who demanded the right to vote!
On Tuesday, July 2, 2002 the Redding City Council voted to put
the Safe Water Initiative on the Ballot in November.
On Tuesday, November 5, 2002, Redding Voters overwhelmingly Approved Measure A. Measure A won in all precincts (i.e, poor neighborhoods as well as rich neighborhoods) in the city.
On Tuesday, December 3, 2002, the Redding City Council unanimously accepted the election results and adopted
Measure A into the City Municipal Code.
A Study on the
Impact of Fluoride on Salmon
Keepers of the Well
Redding Medical Center questionable as
Redding doctors and RMC are investigated and sued for medical fraud.
- More Tenant Hospital links -
Something they know but didn't tell you.
(scroll down link page to read report)
As much as opponents* of Measure A trumpeted about dentists supporting fluoridation only 12 (twelve) Redding dentists contributed meager funds ($100 or less) to support fluoridation. There are over 75 individual dentists in Redding plus an unknown number who work for dental organizations or corporations. The main source of funds to oppose Measure A was Shasta Community Health Center ($19,000), Redding Medical Center ($8,000), and Mercy Hospital ($3,000). (Redding Medical Center is currently under investigation for health care fraud).
****
Fact: According to our City Water Department, only one-quarter of one percent (0.25%) of the City water is actually consummed during our peak water consumption period in the summer.
Yet, the Shasta Oral Health Task Force tried to argue that water fluoridation is "cost effective." With 99.75% of the water is going down the drain or into the ground not many people believed this argument. There are better ways to provide children with topical application of fluoride - if their parents approve and want it. State law already provides for the topical application of fluoride for public and private school children. Yet our County Public Health Department still has not implemented this truly cost effective program.
without consulting voters, or forming a citizens committee to investigate the issue, the Redding City Council decided to explore putting fluoride in city drinking water (September 4, 2001).
After repeatedly ignoring current research and refusing to take action on citizens requests the Redding Citizens for Safe Drinking Water was founded to put a Safe Water Initiative on the ballot.
Over 6,700 signatures were gathered and validated by the County Clerk's office and the Initiative was presented before the City Council. The City Council decided to put the Safe Water Initiative on the November 5, 2002 ballot. This gave the citizens of Redding the opportunity to vote on establishing safety standards for any chemical added to the drinking water with the intent of treating people. City of Redding Measure A was called the Safe Drinking Water initiative.
The Safe Water initiative specifies that no substance can be added to the drinking water for the purpose of treating or preventing disease unless it's approved by the FDA and meets State and Federal for levels for contaminants at all ranges of consumption. Measure A does not prohibit fluoride, however, the chemical the City has chosen (hydrofluorosilicic acid) to use for fluoridation has never been approved by the FDA for the health claims made and would be prohibited.
Q: Who was behind gathering signatures so that Redding citizens could have right to vote?
A: A local group was formed and named Redding Citizens for Safe Drinking Water. The Chairman was: Michel Czehatowski, (send email c/o: eetw@snowcrest.net)
The following are questions from citizens of Redding:
Q: Since the city, without our consent, already adds chlorine and other substances to our drinking water to make it safe to drink, why did we want a safe drinking water ordinance?
A: It's one thing for the city to determine what's needed to kill pathogens to make water safe to drink. But it's another for the City to decide to medicate its citizens, for whatever reason, and especially without FDA approval of that particular medication and the health claims made.
Q: But the FDA doesn't have jurisdiction over water.
A: True, but the FDA does have jurisdiction to approve health claims made for any substance.
Q: Why do some people favor fluoridation of city water?
A: Probably they're unfamiliar with recent research. You might ask them why an orgaization of the nation's top scientists are calling for a moratorium on fluoridation. (Unanimous vote of toxicologists, biologists, chemists, physicians, statisticians, epidemiologists, attorneys, engineers, and scientists, from the Washington, DC office of the Environmental Protections Agency (EPA), testimony before a US Senate hearing on arsenic, radon and fluoride, June 29, 2000. Click here for Documentation )
Q: What are other cities doing?
A: Since 1990, over 300 cities have either decided not to fluoridate or to discontinue fluoridation. On November 6, 2001, the City of Modesto, California voted down fluoride, even thogh proponents had outspent opponents over 10 to 1. The City of Watsonville, Californina also voted for and passed an initiative (Measure S) similar to Redding's Measure A on November 5, 2002. (Click here for more info)
Q: Many people have home filters for their water. Can't fluoride be filtered out?
A: No, not without special, very expensive equipment for a process called reverse osmosis.
Q: That means that we'd have fluoride in our waste water. How about fish and wildlife?
A: Legislators in the State of Washington are currently looking at reported adverse effects of even low levels of fluoride on aquatic life.
Q: Doesn't the EPA monitor water?
A: In 1988 the EPA gave up regulating all water additives in favor of industry self regulation.
Q: What's ahead? What will we be hearing?
A: We can expect to hear that dental decay in poor children's teeth is the reason for fluoridation. But parents, whatever their income levels, can't guarantee that children will brush and floss their teeth. Yet no one is claiming that fluoridation, without brushing and flossing, will prevent tooth decay. We can also expect those in favor of fluoride to spend massive amounts of money to try to win the election. Most likely they will present endorsements by individuals or organizations instead of scientific evidence that addresses the chemical the City intends to use.
**The American Dental Association recommends against using fluoridated water in infant formula, and it also suggests that children under six years old not consume more than two (2) glasses of fluoridated water a day. Who do you think would best be able to avoid tap water, children of low income parents or others? Is it realistic to expect parents, teachers, friends, or neighbors to monitor and limit any child's drinking water, especially in hot summer months?
** Evidently few, if any, local dentists take low income patients, and maybe they think putting fluoride in water for all of us would make their jobs easier. But Mike Robertson, Head of the City of Redding Water Department, states that less than one per cent (0.25%) of our water is used for drinking during peak periods. Yet proponents are saying that fluoridating city water is a "cost effective" way to treat dental decay in low income children. Maybe so. But estimates of "cost effectiveness" have to include costs of lawsuits (occurring right now in other cities) that challenge fluoride's safety and effectiveness.
Q: Are there more problems ahead for the city?
A: Redding's water is very soft, if fluoride were to be added it would create a dangerous pH imbalance that would leach lead out of pipes. The cost of adding more chemicals to balance the ph may be more than the cost of the fluoride. Assistant City Manager Phil Perry reported to the City council that three wells have high levels of arsenic in them already and adding fluoride would increase the level of arsenic. This would put the City in the position of having to remove it from the wells. The estimated cost of doing this is up to $500,000 per well - a cost not addressed by the City's Fluoridation Feasibility report or covered by supposed "grant" money.
Q: If your doctor can't medicate you without informed consent, doesn't it seem strange that a city can?
A: Yes, especially when dentists are treating more and more children for overexposure to fluoride, and there's not practical way to control the quantity of fluoride we ingest (already in food products made with fluoridated water, pesticide residues and natural sources).
Q: Proponents of fluoride say the public should ask doctors and dentists about fluoride? What should we ask?
A: Don't just ask if they favor fluoride or not. See if they have answers for the following questions:
-Ask them how they measure someone's total intake of fluoride from all sources.
-Ask them if you or any of your family members are deficient in fluoride.
-Ask them if they will test you to see if you are deficient.
-Ask them what chemical the City intends to use (hydrofluorosilicic acid). (We found that almost all dentists in Redding could not answer this question correctly.)
-Ask them if you or your children could drink unlimited amounts of water (for example, on a hot day) if fluoride is in the water.
-Ask them if the substance that the city intends to put in the water has been evaluated for safety.
-Ask them if the substances that the city intends to put in the water contains contaminants?
-Ask them why fluoride is listed as a contaminant on the City of Redding Water Report.
-Ask them what parents of infants unders six months of age are supposed to do since you are not supposed to make baby formula with flouridated water.
-Ask them why fluoride would be considered safe when Assistant City Manager, Phil Perry, reported that arsenic levels would increase in the water if fluoride was added.
-Ask them why they would oppose FDA regulation of a substance intended to treat someone.
-Ask them why there was a congressional investigation on fluoride and what was the result?
-Ask them why they don't treat medi-cal patients if they are so concerned about poor peoples teeth.
-Ask them why local dentists have never spoken out about soft-drinks and junk food being sold in our public schools.
Ask them these questions and more!
Q: How did people help win the election in Redding?
A:
1).They wrote to the Redding City Council and City Manager at 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding 96001. Letters became part of the public record and showed residents are opposed to fluoridation. Citizens demanded that they keep fluoride out of the drinking water!
2). Volunteers helped circulate information, talked to their friends and neighbors, posted signs in their workplace or yard, put a "Vote YES on A" bumper sticker on their car, and donated money to help educate the public and pay for educational materials. Though we were a non-profit group, donations were not tax deductable.
Q: Where can we get more information?
A: 1). Check out our links! or 2) email questions or comments c/o: eetw@snowcrest.net
*The City's choice of fluoridation chemical.
volunteer members of the
Redding Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
Last updated 5/22/04
