J Bone Miner Res. 2001 May;16(5):932-9. Effect of long-term exposure to fluoride in drinking water on risks of bone fractures. Li Y, et al; Loma Linda University School of Dentistry, California 92350, USA. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11341339

“A U-shaped pattern was detected for the relationship between the prevalence of bone fracture and water fluoride level. The prevalence of overall bone fracture was lowest in the population of 1.00-1.06 ppm fluoride in drinking water, which was significantly lower (p or =4.32 and < or =0.34 ppm."

I beg citizens to go read this. It well illustrates the disinformation which fills the so called "Clean Water" propaganda.

The references to imagined organ damage come from an equally mistaken view of the 2006 National Academy of Science report.

It really breaks my heart to think that Portland will have poorer oral health because of outright totally mistaken statements like this.

For the sake of the greater good, especially for the children who with fluoride will lead a life of better oral health, please vote "YES" in May.

This drama got its start in North America in the 1940′s after a big effort on the part of industries that were faced with costly law suits over illness and death, things apparently caused by their industrial use of fluorine-containing chemicals. The government of the United States was also involved in fluorine use in its enrichment of uranium for fission bombs. The public became involved unknowingly in 1945 with the beginnings of trials of fluoride as a preventive of dental caries (cavities). These trials were imposed on large cities in Canada, the US and New Zealand without consent of their inhabitants. The goal of some of the actors was prevention of cavities. The goal of the pushers seems to have been to make fluoride look harmless and beneficial, thus making legal challenges hopeless of success. But these trials were imposed without prior tests for safety or effectiveness and fluoridation of public water supplies was approved and promoted by the US Public Health Service in 1950 – half-way through these ill-conceived and incompetently executed trials. After that other government agencies and some professional associations quickly got on the bandwagon. Currently about two-thirds of the population of the United States is using fluoridated water. In Canada usage varies with province but overall less than 40% of the population has it. In Europe the practice has been refused and stopped to the extent that over 90% of the people do not have it.

A brief review of three critical questions about fluoridation follows.

Is fluoridation effective in reducing the incidence of dental caries (cavities)?

Fluoridation of public water supplies has been in effect somewhere in the world for seven decades now. Over that time the prevalence of dental caries has fallen in industrialized countries. This has been taken by many to indicate efficacy. But research has consistently shown that the decrease has occurred in countries without fluoridation to the same or greater degree as in those with fluoridation. Furthermore it is observed that in jurisdictions where fluoridation has been discontinued the incidence of caries has not risen. And studies comparing caries experience of cities fluoridated with cities not fluoridated have shown no difference, except where the nonfluoridated cities do better.

Fluoride intake is a cause of impaired thyroid function. Indeed fluoride was once used medically to suppress thyroid function.
Deleterious effects on reproductive systems in humans have been found to be associated with fluoridation: in girls, early onset of menstruation; in men, low sperm counts.
We now have strong evidence of the association of osteosarcoma in boys and young adult males with fluoridation. Osteosarcoma is a bone cancer which is often fatal.
The possible incidence of bone fracture with fluoridation has been studied with mixed results. One of the strongest studies is presented in a paper by Li et al. published in 2001 which shows a rising prevalence of hip fracture correlated with a rising intake of fluoride starting with concentrations comparable with those used in fluoridation in North America. And this is just one example that suggests that hip fracture is caused by fluoridated water.
Fluoride adversely affects kidneys.
Two recent studies have shown adverse effects on the heart and the aorta.

Fluoridation’s most compelling benefit is the prevention 2/3rds of the operations for terrible cavities in preschooler’s baby teeth. The huge Louisiana study showed 50% of the dental bills avoided for the kids studied

Water Fluoridation & Costs of Medicaid Treatment for Dental Decay. MMWR. CDC 09/03/1999

If this were the only benefit, there would be a 150% return on investment in lower dental bills.

Prev Chronic Dis. 2012 Mar;9: A simulation model for designing effective interventions in early childhood caries. Hirsch GB, et al

These operations include extractions root canals & stainless steel crowns & cost up to $15000. These happen more often in communities CWF. The findings of the Louisiana study has been confirmed in Scotland, Texas, Australia, and New York. Data presented to the Portland, OR City Council showed about 70% prevention of these operations in a comparison of two Oregon towns.

Worried citizens will be presented with about 200 arguments selling fear, risk, and “waste.”

Confidence in a “YES” vote should come from the over 100 prestigious dental & public health societies & health advocacy organizations like the Pew Trust and the American Academy of Pediatrics formally recognize that CWF improves oral health. There are no mainstream national organizations in opposition.

In truth there are no mysterious toxins or dangers.

The Oregonian Editorial Board got it exactly right when it referred to these paranoid theories of nefarious harms as “crackpottery.”

Quote: “To believe such crackpottery is implicitly to believe the following: That state and federal health agencies are, for some mysterious reason, hiding the truth and helping to poison more than 200 million citizens, aided by the American Dental Association and, we guess, credulous editorial boards like The Oregonian’s.

While we don’t consider any of these groups infallible, or even close, it’s far more likely that fluoridation receives so much mainstream support because it does exactly what it’s supposed to. It reduces the incidence of cavities.” – Oregonian Editorial August 14, 2012

CWF opposition harms a community’s oral health. They argue for increased pain suffering & life-long disadvantages. Please vote “YES” in May.

That, sir, is nastiness.