Skyscraper - Grodon's

Sign/William's LSY


Sign/Prestige Home Comfort

Sky - Fire Pre #3

BB/Grand Portage

Click here to see more
Community Calendar
Click here for full listings.
Do campaign signs play a role in helping you decide who to vote for?

Total Votes: 87
View Results Past Polls
User Submitted Photo Gallery
Submit Your Own Photos
2009-07-21 at 04:06

Council says no to fluoride

By Jamie Smith, tbnewswatch
St. Joseph FoundationGrand A Day Draw tickets are now on sale. $1,000 daily draws in November. Grand Prize draw is for $10,000. License #M738339Click Here

City council rode a wave of perceived public opinion early Tuesday morning, voting against a resolution to study the fluoridation of Thunder Bay’s water.

An option that would have brought the matter before citizens as a plebiscite was also turned down by a vote of 6-5.

"We can educate people on nutrition, proper oral care…those are the steps that I’m prepared to take first," said Coun. Trevor Giertuga. "I personally don’t want (fluoride) in my water."

While Giertuga said calls and emails from the public were three to one against fluoridation, Mayor Lynn Peterson said she believed it was more like 10 to one. Peterson voted against the resolution due to environmental concerns and personal choice.

"My issue is 2 million pounds of (fluoride) being washed through our system with only one per cent being consumed (by the public)," said Peterson. "The rest being flushed into the Great Lakes."

Council heard deputations supporting the resolution from more than 10 public health officials from across the province. Ontario Dental Association president Dr. Ira Kirshen, Chief Dental Officer for Health Canada, Dr. Peter Cooney and Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario president Dr. Frank Stechey all spoke at the meeting to convince council of the benefits of fluoridated water.

"I sit here dumbfounded that you don’t listen to the experts that you hire," Stechey told council. "Your public health officials are telling you this (fluoridating water) is the way to go."

Thunder Bay District Health Unit officials have been actively campaigning to get the city’s water supply fluoridated since 2007. Three officials from the health unit spoke to council regarding the safety of fluoride and the urgency in which it’s needed for the local water supply.

"The oral health of Thunder Bay’s children is poor and it’s getting worse," said the health unit’s Cathy Farrell. "We’re well above red flag levels for tooth decay."

City administration said the matter could still be put to a plebiscite if a petition can be signed by 10 per cent of the city’s voters – about 8,600 signatures.
The marathon meeting concluded at 2:40 a.m.

With much of the agenda left untouched, council deferred other matters until Tuesday evening.

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.

Click here to report a typo or error

Banner/Vector Construction


We've improved our comment system.
skycase says:
As a Mother I don't want to add fluoridated to our water. I don't think we should add anything more then what already do.
7/21/2009 6:22:27 AM
acjcry says:
It about time the council came too their senses.Of all the hair brain Idea's we've had in this town,this one has to rate right up there with viciville and Keskus malls. All you have to do is look on the net at places where it's gone bad and it's plain to see that council did their home work.
Thank you
7/21/2009 6:56:11 AM
Knowthetruth says:
Fluoride science came about at a time of high national security.In the 40`s we had lead,asbestos,DDT,doctors recommending cigarettes,ect.Never questioning their health effects. Here is the new science: The toxicity chart shows that sodium fluoride is more toxic than lead, and almost as toxic as arsenic. July of 1987, the maximum contaminant level (MCL) allowed in U.S. drinking water for arsenic was 50 parts per billion (ppb), lead was 15 ppb (as of 12/92) and fluoride was recently changed to 4,000 ppb, which is equal to 4ppm.
On December 7, 1992, the new Environment Protection Agency Lead and Copper Rule went into effect. It sets the MCL for lead at 0.015 ppm, with a goal of 0.0 ppm. Fluoride falls into the same high toxicity range as lead, and, like lead, fluoride is an accumulative poison. Nevertheless, the MCL currently set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (management, not their scientists) for fluoride is now 4.0 ppm, 267 times the permissible lead level.Old Dentist are the worst offenders of toxins-They still promote fluoride and silver fillings made of 50% mercury-ignore the old school dentist who can`t admit they were wrong all along.The real issue is that people don't like changes especially those that require energy to oppose, or time to commit.
7/21/2009 7:58:47 AM
DjMz says:
FINALLY council listens the public! Nevermind the TBDHU, they're just looking for a reason to spend money. Dr. Frank Stechey sounds more like Dr. Sketchy, saying it's what we "need" to do... Way to go Council on FINALLY making a good choice and listening to TBays Citizens!
7/21/2009 9:13:14 AM
Well, I for one am impressed that council listened to the people. The simple thought I see with this is if you want flouride in your water, you put it in. We spent how much trying to remove contaminants from our water, we certainly shouldnt be adding them.. AND in sticking with GUTSHOT's ideals I say this.. "Dont make others pay for your failing teeth." Not to mention like Mayor Peterson said, only 1% of the water is being consumed by people. One issue I have with the story is this quote ........"We can educate people on nutrition, proper oral care…those are the steps that I’m prepared to take first," said Coun. Trevor Giertuga. ............. Trevor, youre not there to educate anybody. Stick to your job! Youre there to represent your voters... and one other concern is the huge double standard we can see with the possible plebiscite and petition in regards to the marina park waste of money and stolen public land.. That's just blatant idiocy which confirms that the whole park thing smells like yesterdays socks.
7/21/2009 9:19:20 AM
bart says:
It's about time that these "supposed" experts got their butts kicked. If these people want fluoride then they can take it themselves, DON'T force others to. Why should I or others take these "experts" at their word? What do they have to lose? How about 100% guarantees that they and their children will pay for the consequences of their actions. I don't think that there would be any takers on that. So they should shut up about it and let each of us make up OUR OWN MINDS on whether we want additional fluoride.
7/21/2009 9:43:53 AM
Karnack says:
The complete ignorance of this Mayor and the Council continues to astound me. Thunder Bay cements it's reputation as a provincial backwater. Show some leadership!
7/21/2009 9:48:57 AM
NancyDrew says:
The health unit is a cult.
7/21/2009 9:57:01 AM
Karnack says:
First Lakehead University becomes the laughingstock of the technology world by banning campus wide Wi-Fi because of quasi science. Now the Mayor and Council ban fluoride for the same reason and becomes the laughingstock of Canada. What professional in their right mind would ever consider moving to this city.
7/21/2009 10:07:44 AM
facepalm says:
@ Karnack - City’s across the country are fighting to have fluoride removed from its water. In 10 years, this issue might prove to put Thunder Bay ahead of the curve (for once).
7/21/2009 10:17:11 AM
question says:
Is there a reason why it is bad to have fluoride in our water? I could only find that it could be linked to cause bone disease. Oh and one more thing; how bad is 4.0 mg/l of fluoride in the water? How much is needed to actually help teeth? Could it be lowered to say 1 mg/l?
7/21/2009 10:23:23 AM
Glenn F Treml says:
We already said no to adding fluoride, and this issue should have been put to rest long ago, so that we can move onto new business. If the dental association is really going to be serious about our health, then why don't they focus on having our dental work covered by health care. The reason people have poor teeth, is not because of the absence of fluoride, but rather they cannot afford to pay the high cost of going to the dentist.
7/21/2009 10:23:32 AM
doug g says:
use toothpaste with floride in it if you want it. The cost out weighs the benifits.
7/21/2009 11:11:55 AM
YQT says:
If you don't wanna brush, or can't afford to brush.... that ain't my problem, nor is it my neighbours problems.

To Karnack, you need a real reality check!!
7/21/2009 12:02:45 PM
Gabbyhayes says:
This was the right decision. It brings to mind the saying and pardon my grammar "If it ain't broke then don't fix it.Our water is as good as or if not better than most communities in North America and the world.The ideal of flushing some 2 Million pounds of fluoride through our system and have only 1% consumed by the public doesn't make any sense to me.There are other means available for those in our community who wish to have themselves and or their children consume fluoride.I repeat If it ain't broke then don't fix it. Particularly when it's a essential service such as the community water supply.
7/21/2009 12:13:28 PM
elvis2010 says:
NancyDrew hit the nail right on the head!
7/21/2009 12:17:39 PM
The Beaver... says:
anyone knows what the Vote came out to be....split...or unanimous.???
7/21/2009 1:24:39 PM
canuckman55 says:
Thankfully council made the right decision!
7/21/2009 1:44:17 PM
Knowthetruth says:
Anyone still not understanding why adding a poison from industrial scrubbers to the water was voted down should read: Attached is a interesting,short 5 minute video if you rather watch that.

7/21/2009 2:17:32 PM
passlake says:
I am glad that the decision went this way..

I was getting estimates to dig a well in my backyard, but I guess I won't have to now!

I still don't have a cavity and I'm nearly 30.. why? because my parents were responsible for ensuring I brushed at least 2x daily and for providing a diet that did not promote tooth decay.. as much as I hated vegetables as a child.. imagine if all parents took that sort of responsibility on??
7/21/2009 2:46:47 PM
facepalm says:
NancyDrew 4 MAYOR!
7/21/2009 2:54:35 PM
mk122 says:
passlake: don't put your shovel down just yet. the pro fluoriders can still get a petition for a plebiscite. the antis have to keep up their non-tax, out-of-pocket funded education campaign before the battle is totally won.
7/21/2009 3:48:41 PM
observer says:
You should have told her royal highness Peterson and her Jokers that the flouride would be part of the waterfront. You would have got it then.
7/21/2009 4:02:34 PM
Jaded says:
As a mother of 5, and a taxpayer, I, for once, am incredibly proud of our city council. I was completely against adding fluoride to our water. One of my children has fluoride allergies, and I'm told that it's not that uncommon an allergy for a person to have. Why should we, and people like us, be forced to go and buy our water? The individuals who want fluoride are free to purchase it for themselves. The concept is not to force the whole to the live to the standards of the few.
7/21/2009 6:13:02 PM
elvis2010 says:
Isn't there enough chemicals in our water already?! And the district "Health" unit is wanting to add more? Take a look at the decline in children's teeth over the years, could it be that their parents have lost their full time jobs with benefits at one of the mills in town and now cannot afford to take their children to the dentist 2 times a year? Put fluoride in the health units water and make them drink it 24/7 if they want it so bad! Funny how council says they cannot vote for this when there are so many people in the city against it but still go ahead with the condos ripping up our marina!
7/21/2009 6:16:18 PM
mk122 says:
so one thing I don't get.. this story claims that the council "rode a wave of perceived public opinion". So the phone calls and emails were "perceived"? The way that is written makes it sound like the councillors gave into some kind of "vocal minority". If that is the case I would disagree with that. Most of the council seemed to be very informed of the issues surrounding fluoridation.
7/21/2009 8:40:56 PM
knowalittle says:
Its interesting how many `experts` take the time and money to try and get fluoride toxic stuff in your water. Who pays them ?. Could it be the fluoride sellers out of the $10 billion or so profits they make ?. I do not know, but I do know it stinks. Congrats to the council - we need more cities with this kind of decision making.I will not even drink beer that comes from fluoridated water. My dog gets sick if he drinks fluoridated water. People get sick - fish get killed - and the list goes on.
7/21/2009 8:48:14 PM
HowIseeThee says:
Wow, for once Thunder Bay Council did something "right"... Too bad it took 30 times longer than any normal city council would waste on such a moronic idea. So, do you have amazing lobbyists or really gullible council members?
7/21/2009 11:00:00 PM
thunderkol says:
Wow, i'm watching the flouride debate repeat and i am impressed with the peoples restraint. Cooney actually said people WANT dental flourosis for the teeth whitening effect...I would have blown my teeth out chewing the chair in front. IS THIS WHAT MY TAX DOLLARS ARE FOR!!!!
7/22/2009 12:00:54 AM
drbob says:
Congratulations! Adding a volatile toxin to your otherwise decent drinking water, then not monitoring the dose nor the effects of lifelong accumulation in sensitive tissues and organs is medical incompetency at best and bordering on malpractice. Not to mention the ethical dilemma of mass medicating without informed consent, and the lack of efficacy proven worldwide. Well done, Thunder Bay. Much more progressive than my hometown of Calgary, where several councillors succumbed to pressure and we lost a recent vote 7-6. You are part of a more informed, conscious and progressive wave.
7/22/2009 1:23:57 AM
Chop suey says:
Here in Southampton UK, our council voted in favour of fluoridation. An opinion poll later showed 72 per cent of the public against fluoride but the council won't reconsider. Now the health authority is forcing it through despite much public opposition. Please can we borrow some of your excellent councillors to replace ours?
7/22/2009 3:11:51 AM
countrygirl74 says:
Hey Thunder Bay! We can sit here and debate this to death. But reality is.... How many kids are even drinking city water?
7/22/2009 8:50:43 AM
MaryS says:
From reading some of these posts, you would think that we were discussing adding cyanide to our water instead of fluoride. Seriously people, cities have been adding it to their water for years and I have yet to see reports of widespread problems from it. As the Head of Chemistry at LU said during an interview on CBC this morning, fluoride is a naturally occuring substance. It's not a pharmaceutical.
I think some people are getting confused between real science which entails rigid trials carried out in controlled situations, and results, which are verified by other scientists, with pseudo-science, which involves cherry-picking information and putting it together to come up with the whatever it is you want to prove. You can't believe everything you see on the internet, "knowthetruth".
7/22/2009 10:41:54 AM
elvis2010 says:
Believe me Chop suey, if you want them I am positive there are more than enough people in this city willing to foot the bill for their airfare. We'd send them by boat but we would need another boat just to get them out to the boat!
7/22/2009 10:56:33 AM
mk122 says:
MaryS: there is a difference between the fluoride that occurs in nature and the fluoride they put in the water. The fluoride they put in the water comes from industrial scrubbers in the fertilizer and aluminum industries. They do not treat it before it ends up in the water, and contains mercury, antimony, arsenic, et al. If you don't like reading things on the internet, Fluoride Deception is a book that is available at Brodie Library.
7/22/2009 1:47:11 PM
Knowthetruth says:
In this video, Christopher Bryson, an award-winning journalist and former producer at the BBC, discusses the findings of his new book The Flouride Deception. EARLY REVIEWS of The Fluoride Deception: "Bryson marshals an impressive amount of research to demonstrate fluoride?s harmfulness, the ties between leading fluoride researchers and the corporations who funded and benefited from their research, and what he says is the duplicity with which fluoridation was sold to the people. The result is a compelling challenge to the reigning dental orthodoxy, which should provoke renewed scientific scrutiny and public debate."

7/22/2009 7:58:45 PM
Chop suey says:
Elvis, however bad you may think your councillors are, they can't be as bad and undemocratic as ours. Remember that ours voted to put fluoride in our water and then refused to reconsider when the public vote showed 72 per cent of residents were against. Many won't even talk about it - a neighbour of mine had an email from one of our own councillors (who just happens to be council leader as well) telling him not to "bother" him and that he would delete all his emails if he got in touch again. Whatever problems you've got, think yourself lucky - you could have our lot in charge! And you are welcome to have them
7/23/2009 2:48:16 AM
mk122 says:
By the way, isn't it nice that city council decided to get security guards in the meeting, just in case any of the pro-fluoriders decided to get violent!
7/23/2009 9:26:16 AM
Karnack says:
Hey Gutshot, I could be wrong, but I think this is the first time more people are in agreement that against your viewpoint. The great unwashed and ignorant are in mass approval. Me thinks you should reconsider your
7/23/2009 1:46:08 PM
Well, you certainly have to wonder to say the least Karnack. I gave myself the thumbs down just to make the world seem right again! That's why my name is GUTSHOT, its hard hitting, it makes a mess of the meat, its extremely unpopular, but its a guaranteed kill everytime!
7/23/2009 3:15:53 PM
elvis2010 says:
Chop suey, you talk about your councilors doing something that the overwhelming majority of your population is against, have you read anything about what our bafoons are doing with our waterfront? Read up on that. They are even keeping everything a secret from us now until all the deals are done.
7/23/2009 7:34:00 PM
snowbird says:
A simple solution to this that would satisfiy the anti-fluoridation cartel.
The capital cost..$462,000
Operating cost $234,800
Total cost for the first year $696,800
Annual cost..$234,000
Use some or all of these dollars to buy sodium fluoride tablets(free gratis) and distribute these tablets to Pharmacys in Thunder Bay.
These tablets could be 'free-of-charge' to the young couples of Thunder Bay.
In the 60's the fluoridation plebiscite was turned down. I bought these tablets and gave them to my children.
My second oldest child is 42 years old and she had her first cavity at the ripe old age of 33 years old.
Fear and doubt are the weapons of the anti-fluoridation cartel.
If you can't believe the Ont. Dental society and the Ont medical society, who can you believe?
7/23/2009 8:50:25 PM
Chop suey says:
elvis, sorry I'd missed that from here in the UK but have read up on it now. You have my sympathies if the council are pressing on with an unpopular agenda. Councillors all over the world should be reminded that they are there to serve the people, not the other way round
7/24/2009 3:21:31 AM
Kelly says:
Tooth decay is a distraction. If flouride's purpose were dental, then toothpaste content would suffice. There is no reason for ingestion.

The purpose of flouride is mental. Flouride empowers psych drugs like Prozac. It creates a docile, lower-IQ population. Its origins trace back to WWII camps.

Ozone purifies water with beneficial health effects, including dental. It is common in Europe.
drfarid dot com/nocavities.html

Found this page through an Alan Watt link, he talks about this piece.
7/28/2009 7:34:57 AM
Comments for this story are semi-moderated. Read our comment guideline.

Add a new comment.
You must log in to add comments.
Create a new account
Forgot password?
Log In