Man says he lowered his town’s water fluoride for over a decade | Hacker News Reader

Man says he lowered his town’s water fluoride for over a decade

arstechnica.com

One question I had was whether fluoridated water provides additional benefit if you are already using a fluoridated toothpaste. Obviously, having it in the water would benefit people who don't regularly brush their teeth, but it's not obvious that it's helpful if you already are getting your fluorine from the toothpaste. It's of interest to me because I drink non-fluoridated well water, but brush my teeth daily with a modern toothpaste. Anyone know?

My quick attempt to research this lead me to this nice Nature article from last year: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02924-6. The article helps to quantify the positives of fluoridation of water: real, but not as large as one might guess. The bulk of the article is about someone who sued the EPA to prevent fluoridation of public water supplies. From what I can tell the suit is much delayed but still in progress: https://fluoridealert.org/issues/tsca-fluoride-trial/.

I was under the impression that fluoride as well as chlorine is added to reduce the risk of bacterial growth in the water supply as well?

We don’t add anything to the water in Denmark unless an added risk of contamination is detected. All toothpaste is fluoridated though.

Around a decade ago I saw an analysis of fluoridated drinking water and iirc the positive for drinking over toothpaste is that the fluoride hangs around in the mouth longer for drinking.

How is it possible (even for a small town of only 4100) that one person can change the water composition for a decade without anyone noticing? Besides the health implication, isn't this a huge national security risk if there is no monitoring in place?

No governance, controls, or risk management over life critical systems. It’s everywhere, you just don’t know or see it until it fails.

You think somebody checks? On anything, ever?

The guy who did it was the water guy, not some random.

This is why we need to get actual meters and assays into the hands of the tinfoilhats.

My parent worked at a water treatment plant in a small town. They could have easily screwed around with the chemical compositions without anyone knowing. Nearly anyone could have brute forced the control room: a single key/lock would need to be bypassed. There was no access control or logging to the room itself, and everyone who worked there had a master key to all buildings and facilities. Lab tests were done on site and were recorded manually, so they could easily just lie about the results.

Reality is we're pretty lucky that terrorists are mostly exaggerated, and the ones that do exist are too mentally unstable to really make a good plan. Virtually no infrastructure has actual physical security in place. Especially when you start to think about modern consumer drone tech.

I’d like to know what levels he was keeping it at.

Some places have too much fluoride. “Too much” harder to calculate because it’s determine by non-tap water exposure. Toothpaste, etc.

There was a scandal in my town when it turned out that we had really high fluoride. Dentists had been warning about it, but nobody wanted to be “the dentist opposed to fluoride.”

It seems the states desired level are pretty low, but it’s frustrating we are not told what he lowered it to.

The linked article says "Chamberlin first acknowledged to town officials on September 19 that he had long been lowering the town's fluoride to roughly half the state's standard".

His resignation letter [1] is more specific, and gives numbers for 2011 to 2022 that range from .33 to .63 ppm. The state recommends (or mandates, depending on who you trust) .7 ppm.

[1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23168705-chamberlin-...

While I don’t know the whole story, this letter makes me feel this guy is in the right:

> In other words, in 2011, federal and state agencies lowered the maximum safe fluoridation levels by half, and lowered the “recommended” levels by a third, but declined to require any mandatory minimum level of fluoridation.

> This misunderstanding was not due to anything 1 said or did. T consistently reported the accurate fluoridation levels to the State in monthly reports and to Richmond Water System Customers in annual reports.

2011 was around the time of the local scandal I witnessed. There was pressure to lower flouridation levels, and many people freaked out - quoting Dr Strangelove - rather than listening to science.

The local scandal I witnessed was eventually resolved when the State dental association got involved.

It would be nice if the Vermont dental association weighed in.

The Netherlands has not fluoridated tap water since '73 :https://fluoridealert.org/researchers/government-reports/the...

It's no big deal.

People rebel against fluoride, but ignore pesticide residues, PFAS contamination, leachates from plastic piping...

I found it funny how pro science the voters of Portland, OR / Multnomah County were when it came to enacting COVID protocols, but have rejected the science of water fluoridation multiple times, most recently in 2013.

Science is wonderful and great and the best as long as it agrees with my existing biases and opinions. Otherwise someone is doing it wrong.

You can stop adding fluoride to water with basically zero consequences (especially if people are already using fluoride toothpaste), whereas "pesticide residues, PFAS contamination, leachates" can't be removed without significant economic impact. Moreover, the economic impact from stopping "pesticide residues, PFAS contamination, leachates" is immediate, whereas any cavities that might show up from stopping flouride will take decades.

Even better, just Reverse Osmosis and remove all of that junk.

Any data on cavities per capita in the area over the past decade?

> there is not a lot of high-quality data looking at all the possible effects of fluoridating community water

This guy just inadvertently (or not) created a great study pool.

There are many parts of Europe that do not add fluoride, often it differs within the same country so you can rule of culture differences:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-of-England-and-Wales...

Same story from the Associated Press:

Worker who lowered Vermont town’s fluoride for years resigns

https://apnews.com/article/health-vermont-fluoridation-publi...

The Arstechnica comments are worthy of a read, I particularly liked the 'Dr. Strangelove' reference.

'How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb' : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Strangelove

>General Jack D. Ripper : You know when fluoridation first began?

Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake : I... no, no. I don't, Jack.

General Jack D. Ripper : Nineteen hundred and forty-six. 1946, Mandrake.

  How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh?

  It's incredibly obvious, isn't it?

  A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual.

  Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.

Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake : Uh, Jack, Jack, listen... tell me, tell me, Jack.
When did you first... become... well, develop this theory?*

"Have you ever heard of a thing called 'fluoridation?'"

https://youtu.be/J67wKhddWu4

Send the guy all of the bills for fillings and the like.

Likely none.

How is there not a single mention of the potential of criminal liability on his part?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com