News

Public has been told about safety of fluoridation

Letters to the Editor
Published July 12, 2004

---

Re: What's in Pinellas' water, editorial, July 8.

Fluoridation of the public water supply is safe. Pinellas County Utilities, as well as most all water utilities, rely on the mainstream medical/scientific community for direction and advice on the treatment of its water supply. A few of the more prominent ones are the Centers for Disease Control, Environmental Protection Agency, American Medical Association, National Sanitation Foundation, state Department of Health and, in addition, on the fluoride question, the American Dental Association and the U.S. surgeon general. These agencies and associations have recognized the safety and the benefits of fluoridation. Their guidance has made the U.S. public drinking water supply the safest in the world.

We have been communicating this information to the public and our customers since the county commissioners decided to fluoridate our water in August 2003. We have specifically targeted our customers with the following:

-- An informational brochure mailed to each customer on Jan. 23 (247,957 mailed).

-- Four separate bill inserts over an eight-month period.

-- 2003 Consumer Confidence Reports mailed to 115,000 customers on June 30.

-- Our Pinellas County Utilities Web site fluoride section with direct links to the Centers for Disease Control, American Medical Association, American Dental Association and World Health Organization.

-- Direct response to every inquiry, whether oral, written or e-mail by both the Utilities Department and the County Commission offices.

-- Letters to dental and medical/health care community (initial, Feb. 17; follow-up, July 2).

The results of our communication program are excellent. Prior to fluoridating our water supply on June 7, our Customer Service Department received 233 inquiries on fluoride, with the majority in support (149 for, 84 against). Since June 7, we have received 28 inquiries on fluoridation, most still in support (17 for, 11 against). Our Web site has received 2,469 hits on fluoride since Jan. 16. We have 360,744 citizens as direct customers. Another 204,563 citizens are customers of the cities to which we sell water. The trend in the number of inquiries is a sharp decline. The customers of our water system have been thoroughly informed about the safety of what their governments put in the public water supply. This is also the case with Tampa, Hillsborough County and St. Petersburg utility customers who have been receiving fluoridated water for years.

The communications being directed to our County Commission and to you, through letters to the editor, are from opponents, many of whom are well-informed on the issue. They do not accept fluoridation of water or the advice of the agencies referred to above. They are well aware of the government's answers to the questions being raised and where to access specific scientific data.

If you want to know more about fluoridation of our water supply, please contact our Web site: www.pinellascounty.org/utilities Included in this information is expert reporting on frequently asked questions concerning hydrofluorosilic acid and other fluoride treatment compounds.

-- Pick Talley, director, Pinellas County Utilities, Clearwater

Officials shun fluoride debate

In reference to the open debate on the safety of the fluorides approved for addition to our water supply by Pinellas County commissioners:

The challenge to the pro-fluoride proponents of Pinellas by two distinguished scientists flown in from out of town was was met with absolute cowardice as not one of more than 16 dentists, Health Department and Utilities Department representatives arrived at the Great Fluoride Debate July 8. Their seats were empty.

City and county officials exhibited an embarrassing lack of respect and professionalism with a complete absence at this historic event.

Rather than giving these fine reputable gentlemen a warm welcome, and a thank you for their concern for the safety of our citizens, Pinellas County commissioners, and all county officials were absent, most with no response to their invitation. There was not one representative of our local government to welcome these guests.

With quotes from these pro-fluoride proponents on Power Point presentation, the scientists won hands down in response to oftentimes untruthful and misleading facts these pro-fluoride dentists and representatives had stated to the public. For each quote, they presented proof and documentation exposing gross falsehoods presented to the public during this fluoride campaign in our county. No wonder they hid in the shadows.

-- Virginia Brown, Clearwater

Presentation was convincing

Re: What's in Pinellas' water, July 8.

I am pleased the Times editorial backs the idea of the Pinellas County Commission carefully reviewing the science behind the use of the specific form of industrial by-product fluoride that has been promoted by Pick Talley.

I am very disappointed, however, with the rather arrogant decision made by our county administrators and our public health and drinking water safety officials to boycott the opportunity to at least hear about all of the current scientific studies regarding this public health matter at the Harborview Center meeting.

I attended that meeting and listened carefully to what the two highly qualified experts on the science of fluoridation had to say. It was a very thought-provoking and intellectually powerful and well-documented presentation made by a university chemistry professor and a highly experienced EPA scientist. I was overwhelmingly convinced that our county's precious water supply is now actually being polluted by this phosphate industry waste product.

It is apparent to me now, after having the benefit of the science education in fluoridation, that our elected officials were greatly ill-advised by those who brought this to their attention and claim false public health benefits. Specific advocacy commentary made by dentists and other authority figures, and published in the Times were proven to be blatantly false and misleading.

-- Thomas Nocera, Clearwater

State works hard to improve KidCare

The July 5 St. Petersburg Times article, Aching for health coverage, expresses concerns about Florida's KidCare program. It is important to note that over the last five years, the governor and the Legislature have worked hard to maintain the program's long-term viability while improving its ability to positively affect the lives of children. This year's legislation extends coverage to many thousands more children and maximizes federal matching funds. In addition, the measure adds safeguards to the program to ensure Florida's most vulnerable are served not only today but also into the future. With 2.8-million Floridians currently uninsured, they felt it vital that the program make those who have no other source of health insurance a priority.

Although much remains to be done, a review of the numbers verifies an unprecedented commitment to children's health insurance in Florida. The number of children served by KidCare, including Medicaid, has nearly doubled from 770,000 children in 1998 to more than 1.5-million served today. The number of children served by the Title XXI programs of KidCare, has tripled since 1998. In 1998-99, total funding for KidCare was $1.6-billion. In 2003-04, that funding level topped $3.3-billion - more than doubling the state's financial commitment in less than six years.

The governor and the Legislature continue to lead the fight for improved access to quality health care for Florida citizens. In addition to increasing the number of children served under KidCare, the Legislature passed HB 1629 this year, which included reforms aimed at improving accessibility and affordability of health insurance in Florida. Based in large part on recommendations from the Governor's Task Force on Access to Affordable Health Care and the House of Representatives Select Committee on Affordable Health Care for Floridians, this legislation was conceived in meaningful discussion, input and opinion expressed during public meetings, held around the state.

Moving forward, we must continue working together to design and implement, stable, long-term strategies that increase the number of children covered by health insurance. Ultimately, our goal can be nothing less than access to health care for all children in Florida.

-- John O. Agwunobi, M.D., secretary, Florida Department of Health, Tallahassee

Better diet, better health

Re: Aching for health coverage, July 5.

Alisa Ulfert's article pointed out the American tragedy, that there are people in this country who are not adequately covered by health insurance. It is a travesty that families must wait to get on the Florida KidCare insurance program.

However, possibly the greater tragedy is found in the pictures accompanying the article. It is not difficult to see that the parents mentioned in the article are overweight. The Ramos' asthma-suffering children are shown in front of a meal of hot dogs, buns and soda. This typical American diet is not exactly a healthful one, to say the least. It is laden with sugar along with many preservatives and additives. No healthful salad greens or fresh fruits are seen anywhere.

Go to any alternative practitioners, and they will tell you that this diet is the probable cause of asthma and possibly fibromyalgia, among many other diseases.

Maybe it's time that we start critically looking at what we eat as the cause of disease instead of waiting for a doctor to prescribe medications, which we cannot afford and which are probably not necessary and even possibly harmful.

Maybe it is time we start using our common sense and paying attention to what we eat, drink and breath: lifestyle change, they call it. It would surely benefit our health and save unnecessary health care expenses.

-- Carol Stronstorff, Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Patients, Inc., a Florida non-profit patient's rights organization, Bradenton

Focus on smoking ban's success

Re: Smoking away, despite the ban, July 5.

Certainly, anyone can find four or five businesses that are not complying with any number of laws in Florida. Does this make for a case against the new smoking law? Hardly.

This article makes it seem as though there is doubt about the law, but the facts are that thousands of businesses are successfully smoke-free, Floridians love their new freedom from secondhand smoke, and we now know it's good for business, too.

A study recently released by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida has concluded the smoke-free amendment has not had a negative impact on the hotel, restaurant, or tourism industries. Specifically the study found that while sales for restaurants, lunchrooms, and catering services were up 7.37 percent, there was no significant change in the sales of taverns, nightclubs and bars.

Instead of celebrating a few malcontents, let's focus on how many Floridians no longer have to risk exposure to carcinogenic tobacco smoke just to enjoy a meal out or to hold a job.

-- Dennis Martin, volunteer advocacy chair,American Cancer Society, Greater Tampa Unit

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to 727 893-8675 or through our Web site at: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.

[Last modified July 12, 2004, 01:00:30]