From Deseret News archives:

Fluoride back on the ballot

But opposition in Tooele is still strong and reasons varied

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005 11:22 p.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
TOOELE — When residents here vote next week, they will be asked whether they want fluoride added to their drinking water, six years after voters defeated that same idea by a nearly two-to-one margin.

Tooele dentist Dr. Clair Vernon and Tooele County Health Department director Myron Bateman asked the City Council last month to consider placing the question of fluoridation back on the ballot because, as they see it, Tooele's changing demographics mean there are a lot of new voters, many of them young families with children who could especially benefit from fluoride.

"I still know it's an important thing, and there's a lot of newer, younger families that have moved into Tooele," Vernon said. "I thought maybe now we can get it to pass. It's beneficial to everyone. It's like putting money in a bank. The sooner you start in your life, the better the end result."

But its approval in Tuesday's election is far from a sure thing.

Opponents are many and varied — Vernon calls them the "vocal minority" — and their reasons for their opposition are diverse, ranging from health and safety concerns to the question of the right to choose.

Annette York, a Tooele mother and grandmother, said she sees the benefits of fluoride but believes it should be left up to parents to decide when and how to give it to their children.

Story continues below
"I gave my kids fluoride, and my kids have good teeth, but the thing that troubles me is that when I was raising my kids my pediatrician had me not start fluoride until they were a little bit older," she said. "They don't continue giving it to them into their teenage years. The thing that concerns me is that a lot of people's rights to clean water are taken away if we put it in the water system."

She said she worries about the cumulative effect of things being added to the water. Such things as chlorination, she said, are essential for public health and safety, but water officials should draw the line when it comes to unnecessary additions like fluoride.

"I'm not one of the ones who go around screaming, 'Poison, poison,' " she said.

Others, however, are. Many opponents say fluoride is a health risk. Campaign literature and many Web sites link fluoride to thyroid disease, diseases of the brain and eventual damage to children's teeth, among other things.

But Vernon said fluoridation has been practiced for 60 years, since Grand Rapids, Mich., first added fluoride to its drinking water in 1945. Today, 43 of the nation's 50 largest cities have fluoridated drinking water. Voters in Salt Lake and Davis counties have approved water fluoridation in recent years.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

previousnext

Latest comments

Editorial: 10 years of TRAX

Sorry earlier I meant to say that tracks seems to travel at 35 miles an hour...

'Peter Frumhoff, the director of science and policy at the Union of...

The Non-BCS crowd ought to create their own title game...their own brand, and...

Letters: Democrats' ethics

That's the whole of your defense of GOP resistance to badly-needed ethics...

Your criticism should hardly be focused on Bennett alone. What about all the...

'Wired's Threat Level blog reported on November 20 that Gavin Schmidt, a...

The reality of climate change is supported by multiple lines of evidence and...

BYU professor remembered

I had the priviledge of staying in the LeBaron home on severl occasions as I...

Letters: Growing jobless rate

So the unemployment rate has dropped to "just" 10%, huh? I wonder what that...

Ahh for the love of money...what money can buy!!!

Advertisements