The Adobe Flash Player is required to view this multimedia interactive. Get it here.

Fluoride in water on agenda in Xenia again

1 dead in car-semi crash
Updated 9 min. ago
Tecumseh council scouts collect over 68,000 pounds of food to fill local food pantries
9:37 p.m.
Easter Bunny’s arrival brings hugs and smiles
8:26 p.m.
Mercy founder’s supported civic causes of all kinds
8:21 p.m.
Mercy Hospital was hailed  as ‘a glorious beacon of light’
8:19 p.m.
> More headlines

By Christopher Magan, Staff Writer 3:32 PM Monday, November 23, 2009

XENIA — City Council will once again debate whether the city should add fluoride to its municipal water supply even though past attempts have faced the bite of public criticism.

Dennis Propes, council president, said he’s wanted to add fluoride to the city’s water since he joined the council in 2006. He chose not to seek another term and will leave the council at the end of the year.

“Fluorination of water is, next to vaccinations, one of the top advancements of public health in the 20th century,” Propes said.

But opposition to adding the chemical that is known to strengthen teeth and help prevent cavities has a history dating back to 1969 when city voters chose to be exempt from a new law requiring water fluorination.

Ballot initiatives about fluoride kept the chemical out of the Xenia water supply in 1987 and again in 2005.

The city is one of 23 in the state, including Lebanon, Greenville, Oakwood, Springfield and Troy that do not add fluoride, according to the state department of health. About 91 percent of Ohio residents drink fluorinated water from a municipal source.

Propes will introduce an ordinance Tuesday, Nov. 24 that would use a state grant to fund nearly all the cost. He isn’t confident his proposal will win the community or other council members’ support.

“Unfortunately, Xenia has an aging population that is against it,” he said.

Share this article

ADD COMMENT

Comments feed

Seems like inconvenient facts only poses as bright.What worthless comments that miss any mark. Yoder K.M. at pubmed.com in 2007 Indiana proved dental professionals clueless with very few knowing the change in science. 17% in Indiana and 14% in Illinois is the opposite of professional level. any benefit is topical post eruptive and not pre eruptive ingested as most still believe.Most dentists have no clue but repeat like robot parrots ADA talking points. Most refuse to treat poor medicaid kids.

Jim Schultz
2:42 PM, 12/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

many foods have much more then the 1ppm added to the water. Most beverages have as much and many juices much more. Mechanically deboned meats like hot dogs or chicken nugget can be fluoride toxic from bone powder which is sky high fluoride rich.
Many vegetables are crazy high from pesticide residues and also 200 food groups are fumigated with sulfurl fluoride termite poison. Up to 900ppm is legal for dried eggs and 70ppm for any processed grain product. Nuts at 20-30ppm. grains up to 130ppm.FAN

Jim Schultz
2:32 PM, 12/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

The headquarters union of the EPA in DC first called fluoridation fraud when they discovered altered documents in 1985. They filed a lawsuit against management in 1986 to halt this fraud. The federal courts refused to hear it. In 2005 11 EPA science unions asked congress to halt fluoridation. They also did the math and proved the goal should be ZERO just like other cumulative toxins arsenic and lead of about same toxicity. Strangely it is rarely mentioned most arsenic and lead is from fluoride.

Jim Schultz
2:14 PM, 12/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

All current researchers now admit any benefit is topical. None can show a mechanism of benefit at 1ppm and below 1000ppm is even questionable for young kids.
The bedrock studies were so flawed as to not be science as the design and altering of selected groups changed in the studies. Never has been a double blind study showing benefit ever by ingestion.
10% was to be the limit on dental fluorosis but now the biggest study ever in US showed 66.4%. This was NIDR 39,207 kids in 84 communities.

Jim Schultz
2:09 PM, 12/1/2009

REPORT ABUSE

Odd, how Councilman Propes ridicules the aging population, but still relies on aging science -- research that has been pretty much discounted in the last few years.

Casey
12:25 PM, 11/25/2009

REPORT ABUSE

There are 33 additional comments

SHOW ALL

We welcome your comments. Please remember this is a public forum and behave appropriately. Your comments must conform to our visitor's agreement.