Dear Dr.

Coon,

May 3, 2012

I am communicating with you as a result of your comments to Charlottesville Council on April 2, 2012. But first, let me tell you something about myself. I was an educator for 33 years at the junior high, senior high and college level with six of those years teaching science. In June of 1993 I was diagnosed with invasive oral squamous cell carcinoma. Through the medical practitioners I turned to in dealing with my cancer, I learned about the damage fluoridated water could do as it related to my body, my immune system and my recovery. Because of my experience and subsequent research, I disagree with you and the Charlottesville Albemarle Dental Society that fluoridation is safe and effective for all. Your statement that systemic fluoride benefits developing teeth is incorrect, a fact pointed out by the CDC and others in 1999 and by the ADA in July 2000. Supported by the La Salud, Cuba study.(1 )( 2) Also, contrary to your statement, the CDC said in 2001 that systemic fluoride secreted in saliva is of too low a concentration to affect cariogenic activity.(3) You failed to tell Council that fluoride ingested during tooth development can result in dental fluorosis, a condition that the 1999-2004 NHANE Survey found in 40.7 % of adolescents aged 12-15. Also, there was no mention of the unsightly, unacceptable moderate and severe fluorosis that was found in 3.6% of the children surveyed.(4) You did not address sub-groups of the population that are particularly susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride, especially the most sensitive of all, infants that are exposed to high levels of fluoride when powdered formula is reconstituted with fluoridated water (no doubt the cause of some of the severe fluorosis noted above). You did not mention any of the numerous published warnings.(5) No mention was made regarding the one percent of the population that both dental and medical investigators have found to be sensitive to fluoride. One of these people is Aliss Terpstra, whom I met last year. Please familiarize yourself with this shamefully neglected ramification of fluoridation.(6) Considering the comments made to Council, it is quite apparent that the American Dental Association’s publication, Fluoridation Facts (7) was used as a primary reference source. As anyone familiar with this issue can tell you, the ADA does not hesitate to misrepresent or omit factual information. For example, in the 2005 edition of Fluoridation Facts, when you read Question 22 “When fluoride is ingested, where does it go?” I am sure you accepted, in good faith, their answer--into the developing tooth to give long lasting protection against dental decay. However, the ADA, in its quest to push and maintain water fluoridation, used a 1986 reference to make that point, ignoring their own July 2000 JADA Cover Story that says: “Fluoride incorporated during tooth development is insufficient to play a significant role in caries protection.” Thus, no point in swallowing fluoridated water. Dr. Coon, please understand, this communication is not sent to antagonize you or the members of the Charlottesville Albemarle Dental Society that you represent, as I am sure you did not intentionally plan to mislead. At this point, however, I respectfully request that you give serious consideration to what the following professionals have to say about their experiences with water fluoridation.

Richard Foulkes, MD, relates how it was that he at first promoted and then condemned fluoridation. He also reviews the Kingston vs. Newburgh fluoride study. The 1951 Proceedings reveal the fluoride deceptions that the US Public Health Service encouraged: http://www.scribd.com/doc/90830396 Bill Osmundson, DDS, MPH, promoted fluoridation for 25 years then looked at current literature. His letter to the British Medical Journal is very informative: http://www.scribd.com/doc/88687940 Hardy Limeback, PhD, DDS, outlines his arguments that fluoridation is an ineffective and harmful public health policy: http://www.scribd.com/doc/17172739 David Kennedy, DDS, succinctly explains to California officials why fluoridation is harmful. http://www.scribd.com/doc/90638965/Kennedy John Colquhoun, BDS, PhD, explains “Why I Changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.” Note graph showing that tooth decay started to decline well before the use of fluorides (Fig. 1 after the references). http://www.fluoridation.com/colquhoun.html State Representative Joey Hensley, MD, recommends that Tennessee water systems stop fluoridating. http://www.fluoridealert.org/hensley.pdf This revealing paper trail shows some of the history of fluoridation and what it can do to our bodies. At the end there is an interesting letter revealing that, while the AMA endorses fluoridation, they are not prepared to state that “no harm will be come to any person by water fluoridation.” http://www.scribd.com/doc/89672052/Fluoridation-History-From-Tampa-Bay-to-Our-Bodies While the Virginia Department of Health claims that water fluoridation reduces dental decay in permanent teeth by approximately 17 to 40 percent, the reports from long time fluoridated cities tell a very different story: http://www.scribd.com/doc/91756830/Fluoridation-Failures In the interest of science I have prepared and given to Council a document titled: “Request for Truthfulness and Full Disclosure in Annual Water Reports.” It consists of current, documented and referenced information from which citizens and public officials can make informed fluoride decisions. As is done in good science, if you find errors, please point them out to me. http://www.scribd.com/doc/92282139/Request-for-Truthful-Water-Quality-Reports If I may be of assistance to you or anyone in the dental society, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Kenneth Case
1. http://www.scribd.com/doc/90812527/Fluoride-Action-Topical-References http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/wk/mm4841.pdf MMWR, Oct. 22, 1999 (Full text). 2. http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/topical-systemic.aspx More topical literature references. 3. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr5014.pdf MMWR, Aug. 17, 2001: Action topical, Ductal saliva ineffective. 4. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db53.htm CDC Data Brief, Nov. 2010. Fluorosis = 40.7% and 3.6% 5. http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/infant/ Fluoride Warnings for Infants. 6. http://www.scribd.com/doc/90723635/ Fluoride Sensitivity, Aliss and Deloss tell their stories, References. 7. http://www.ada.org/sections/newsAndEvents/pdfs/fluoridation_facts.pdf ADA’s Fluoridation Facts.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful