18. To force fluoridation down unwilling throats is not the American way. Every human being and domestic animal would be coerced into drinking fluoridated water making a veritable fluoride storehouse of our bodies. 19. The health and safety code refuses the right to any department of health to force compulsory dental examination or service. 20. Dental caries (decay) creates no epidemic or emergency of a contagious or infectious disease, therefore, there is no "clear and present danger" at all, and therefore no Public Health police power need be invoked. 21. Consequently, it must stand that fluoridation of public water is unconstitutional and is in violation of State laws and the Federal Constitution. 22. If the State wants to make fluoridated water available to children, to partially prevent dental caries, fluoridated bottled water can be placed in the schools and homes of children for those who want it. The conflict would then be resolved and at a cheaper price money wise, as well as from the standpoint of infringement upon individual rights. 23. Scientists, now engaged in this research work, state that it will require 20 years to a life span before these experiments can give any meaningful results. Only the uninformed and the misinformed want fluoridation. 24. For the preservation of good health and the welfare of our total population do not sanction fluridation of public water supplies. 25. Pass the bill, H. R. 2341. 26. Allow bottled fluoridated water to be made available to those who want it, thus permitting us all to have freedom of choice. I have a resolution of the Citizens Committee Against Fluoridation and the Connecticut Pure Water Association that I would like to present. Mr. HESELTON. It will be made a part of the record. (The resolution referred to is as follows:) RESOLUTION AGAINST FLUORIDATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES Whereas fluoridation of public water supplies is in contravention of constitutional rights; and Whereas fluoridation is a potential danger from sabotage or defective equipment; and Whereas fluoridation coerces mass medication on entire populations; and Whereas fluoridation is proven to be a cumulative poison, destructive to body enzymes, and a protoplasmic poison; and Whereas individual biological variation precludes possibility of a "safe" amount of fluoride; and Whereas science does not yet have a sufficiently delicate analytical technique to detect with certainty what is called subclinical injury; and Whereas fluoridation is not necessary for healthy tooth formation and has never been proven necessary to maintain proper functioning of any body tissue; and Whereas various bureaus endorse fluoridation but do not guarantee (assume responsibility for) its safety; and Whereas fluoridation may jeopardize the health of the nation; and Whereas fluoridation is economically unsound because water consumed for drinking and cooking constitutes only 1 percent of total amount of water used; and Whereas fluoridated bottled water can be made available to individuals by local health departments, or by capsules, tables, etc.: Therefore be it Resolved, That no attempt shall be made to tamper with the public drinking water other than for the purpose of purification; and we are unequivocally opposed to the addition of any fluoride to any public water supply. CITIZENS COMMITTEE AGAINST FLUORIDATION, Mr. HESELTON. Your 15 minutes have expired. Miss VAN DE VERE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HESELTON. On behalf of the committee, I want to express our appreciation of your coming here and presenting the results of your extended studies. The committee has gone 15 minutes beyond the ordinary time for adjournment and there are other matters that the members of the committee have to attend to before leaving tonight, so we will adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. I would suggest this, however, that those who have not spoken, might well confer together and see if they will not be able to so arrange their statements that they will be able to stay within the time available. That is from 10 o'clock in the morning, until 12 o'clock noon. Then, the opponents will start their presentation at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, if we can obtain permission of the House to sit. (Miss Van de Vere submitted the following statement for the record:) STATEMENT OF MISS VAN DE VERE 1. Newburgh and Grand Rapids Fluoridation Experiment Stations show statistics which prove that by age 17 to 18 years, fluoridated water aggravates dental decay, so that there is far more dental decay evident in those children who have used fluoridated water than in the children who have used water without fluoride. 2. Knowing that fluoride attacks nerve cells (animal experimentation proves mental retardation among rats which were fed fluoridated water, Representative A. L. Miller's report-Congressional fluoridation investigation, 1952), is it any wonder that there is evidence of marked intracranial (means within the brain) disease among Grand Rapids residents? Fluoride is an insidious poison which works slowly but surely in its devastating effect and impairment of physiological processes. 3. The most recent report on dental decay in Science magazine of May 14, 1954 (by Joseph C. Muhler and William G. Schafer), published by the American Association for Advancement of Science, states, "Decreased thyroid activity is related to increased caries (dental decay) (susceptibility) in the rat. Desiccated thyroid reduces the incidence of dental decay to the same degree as sodium fluoride alone." This observation bears out more strongly that dental decay is not due to a lack or shortage of fluorine in the diet or in the teeth. 4. A communication from Dr. Prothro, public health officer of Grand Rapids, Mich., in 1952 stated that he is chairman of the heart committee and he is far more interested in reducing deaths from heart disease than in reducing dental decay in children, and if there is any scientific information which could be made available to him, it would be appreciated. In response to this request I sent a letter to Dr. Prothro, in which I stated the following information-which may explain why fluoride could be the cause of so many deaths from heart disease. My reasoning is this: We know that fluoride has a powerful affinity for calcium, and we know that, because of this, tetany (muscle cramp) in legs or arms is frequently observed, due to a calcium deficiency. Now transfer this reasoning of the muscle cramp (which occurs in legs and arms) to a similar muscle cramp which occurs in the heart (heart is a large muscle) and we have the reason for increase in deaths from heart disease in areas where water is artificially fluoridated. Residents from Grand Rapids and other fluoridated areas told us that their people come home from work, mention that they feel very tired, and drop dead. Gentlemen, this is a situation which should no longer be allowed to continue! 5. With all this scientific data aside, going on to another aspect of the fluoridation program. It is the unprecedented behavior of our local public health officials in Hartford, who removed and hid the antifluoridation exhibits from thet Union Railroad Station (Hartford, Conn.) which had attracted tremendous crowds of people. The Hartford Health Department exhibited their profluoridation display in the railroad station, bank lobbies, theaters, PTA meetings, publichealth meetings, and the Municipal Building. Yet, after permission from the New Haven Railroad manager was granted to show the antifluoridation exhibit, they were removed, without permission, by the Hartford Health Department officers, hidden away for days, without notice to anyone connected with antifluoridation, though my name and address were clearly written on each part of each exhibit. They also removed the antifluoridation exhibit from our public library. When I appealed to our city manager, Carleton Sharpe, he said, "It is customary for the city manager to stand behind the heads of departments whom he appoints, and I shall not interfere with the activities of the health department. Sorry, nothing can be done." He also refused to allow our antifluoridation exhibit in the Municipal Building lobby, though he allowed the profluoridation exhibits for a long time. This was during the period when our Connecticut Legislature was in session in 1953. However, I must give full credit and appreciation to our Governor, John Lodge, who was fair enough to allow both the pro and the antifluoridation exhibits to be displayed in our State Capitol during the period when our legislature was considering some bills on fluoridation. How is one to interpret such openly antagonistic behavior by the Hartford Health Department? I tell you this, gentlemen, that you may know that fluoridation is more than a scientific venture or a medical program. More recently, our Public Health Dentist Menczer sent information across the country that our Hartford City Council favors fluoridation, when the truth is that Hartford city councilmen voted against fluoridation of public water supplies 6 to 2 (corporation council's letter in committee flles). Then, on February 10, 1954, this same Public Health Dentist Menczer was about to give a talk on fluoridation of public water supplies to a club of young mothers at the public health building. He sent for Police Officer Lee because I and an assistant were distributing antifluoridation fliers, together with a flier from the United States Department of Agriculture, which information states that good food makes good health and good teeth. The complaint against me was that I was distributing "offensive literature." We continued to distribute these in the public health lobby to the club members as they arrived. The public health dentist continued to berate us and pleaded with the club members to return the fliers to me and not read them. Needless to say, none were returned, but were placed in their bags for future reading. The police could find nothing "offensive" about the material which we distributed and he told us that the antifluoridationists might go up to the meeting. Officer Lee told him that this is a public building, that the lecture is public health, and the dentist is a city employee. Dentist Menczer forbid us to attend. We went to the police building for advice. There was unanimous opinion among all the detectives and patrolmen on duty that we cannot be barred from that meeting. They urged us to attend. When we returned at about 10 p. m. the building was in darkness and the door locked. Next day we learned that the meeting was not over until 11: 30 p. m., that Dentist Menczer locked the door and extinguished the hall lights to keep us out. In March 1954 Jaycees in Bristol, Conn., planned a closed meeting on fluoridation of public water supplies, to be attended only by the city councilmen, the water commissioners, and the unit of public health experts-(public health officer, public health dentist, public health sanitary engineer (who plans the technical details for installation of fluoridating machinery)—and public health profluoridation speakers. After a tremendous struggle and final intervention in our behalf by a retired chief justice, whose contention was that every resident who drinks the public water should have a right to attend such a meeting, to know what is planned to put into his water supply, and that the invitees should be permitted to hear both sides of such a controversial subject. The meeting, at the last moment, was opened to the public, but there was no opposition allowed to be voiced, no discussion allowed from the floor. The only questions answered were by written request, and then only proponents of fluoridation were answered. The Jaycees had been asked to sign a request for fluoridation, many months ago, by the State board of health; before they had heard anything for or against fluoridation, and they acceded because the board of health asked that they should. So it was with the CIO, many PTA's and other organizations, who have implicit faith in the health department and would not question their activities. This whole thing is an exact duplicate of what the Hartford Health Department did all last year, when they discontinued open debates and forums on fluoridation. (This was on the advice of United States Public Health Service as reported in the excerpts of fourth conference public health, dental association, and child welfare.) Is this the American way? Countless radio programs carried profluoridation propaganda, but our public health officials did not allow the program directors to permit antifluoride programs. They made many desperate efforts to prevent my TV panel of Dr. Leo Spira, M. D., Dr. Ginns, D. M. D., and Dr. Robert H. Mick, D. M. D., all practicing doctors, and myself, from going on WNHC-TV (New Haven). However, this TV program director stood his ground because he had given the profluoridation public health officials twice as much time about a year before, and opponents of fluoridation had been requesting, by petitions and individually, for free equal time. Now we are having a repetition of this situation on another network. Why is the public health afraid to let the public hear or read anything against fluoridation? Are they engaged in thought control as well? 6. These are statement of facts. I respectfully submit this information that you may know something of the background which accompanies this forceful effort of the public health to fluoridate our public water supplies. 7. A little over a year ago I had a very violent allergic reaction from drinking two cupfulls of coffee in a fluoriated area. Immediately upon finishing the second cupful, which was about 15 or 20 minutes after the first cupful of black coffee, I got violent cramps, felt nauseated, suffered excruciating pain. The room began to spin around, so that I clutched the table where I had been drinking coffee. My eyes immediately swelled shut, also my lips. My tongue became swollen and looked like a golf ball. I could not speak for hours. My face became yellow and swollen to three times its usual size, then large blisters, the size and shape of big peanuts appeared on the lower part of my face. After about 2 days, these blisters broke and there was a violent gush of clear fluid. It happened suddenly and with such force that it took all the skin off my face and throat. I was left with bare red flesh, pouring large quantities of clear fluid. The burning, itching, tingling sensation was more than a human being could bear. I was in extreme agony, night and day, unable to sleep, with pins and needles sensation along the underside of my forearms from elbow to and including the little finger and ring finger and constant, terrific headache. The M. D. who attended me had never seen such a case before, and declared that it looked like a violent arsenic poisoning. After about 7 weeks of struggling with this baffling illness, I went to an allergist. He, too, was unable to make a diagnosis at that time. He tried everything until he found a way to help me and skin began to grow on my face and throat. During this entire siege I had become allergic to many things, including tobacco smoke (I don't smoke). During this time and even now, about 18 months since the fluoride poisoning, my hair has been falling out by the handful. The definite diagnosis has now been made. Others have had similar experiences. I do not know whether, on that day, the fluoride mixing machine went out of control (this happened often), or whether the coffee had been simmering for a long time, thereby increasing the concentration of fluoride. Should anything so hazardous as fluoride be allowed as an addition to any public water supply? During our brief visit to Washington, D. C., some of us used pure spring water from a local bottling company and avoided any food which was cooked in water. Those of my colleagues who tossed caution to the wind suffered terrific cramps, diarrhea, and headache. That is the usual reaction of the body to the first ingestion of fluoridated water. Then they had to carry a one-half gallon jugful of the pure spring water with them, as it became necessary to flush and dilute the poison. Large quantities of milk gave some relief, as it replaced the calcium which is immediately attacked by the fluoride. Middle-aged and older people suffer most; also the chronically ill, as well as the malnourished children and adults. Gentlemen, it is as much a crime to allow fluoridating of public water supplies as it is to allow a maniac to run loose and discharge firearms. Nobody knows who is going to get hurt or who may die as a result of it. May I therefore respectfully implore you to pass H. R. 2341 and set us all free from this abomination which has come to our country? If your thinking should lead you to believe that passage of this bill, H. R. 2341, would interfere with States' rights, please, gentlemen, consider, for example, murder. That is not allowed in any State. Therefore, to prevent murder, or any other thing which could cause harm to any human body should be considered in the same light. Passage of this bill would not deprive any individual from the use of fluoride in any form, but it would prevent dire effects upon others if forced to accept it. (Thereupon, at 4:50 p. m., the committee adjourned to meet at 10 a. m.. the following day, Wednesday, May 26, 1954.) |