Under construction

DHS and Fluoridation

WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT DHS & FLUORIDATION?
For the past several years, the Sonoma County Department of Health Services (DHS) has been actively promoting what it calls Community Water Fluoridation (CWF), pressuring the Board of Supervisors to add fluoride to all water sold by the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), wholesale water supplier to most of Sonoma County’s largest cities and water districts, and the North Marin Water District (NMWD).

The DHS graphic shows only SCWA’s Sonoma County customers. SCWA supplies Marin County water customers, NMWD, serving Novato, and Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), serving communities in Southern Marin, especially along the Highway 101 corridor. MMWD buys 25% of its water from SCWA, which MMWD fluoridates, as it does its locally sourced water. North Marin prefers its water unfluoridated, but would have no choice if SCWA fluoridates its water at the top of its supply chain.

ISN’T OUR WATER FLUORIDATED ALREADY?
In Sonoma County, only the City of Healdsburg fluoridates its drinking water. In 1952, the first time the fluoridation establishment tried to fluoridate Sonoma County water, activists now in their 80s and older prevented fluoridation in Santa Rosa, but not in  Healdsburg. Other Sonoma County cities might have rejected fluoridation then too, but undigitized mid-20th century municipal records are a challenge to access, and surviving eye-witnesses are rare.

As in Sonoma County in 1952,  when water fluoridation is attempted one community at a time, “success” is dificult. That’s the reason the fluoridation establishment is pushing for more state-wide fluoridation mandates like California’s AB733 (1995).

For a city or water district to fall under California’s fluoridation mandate,  it must have 10,000 or more active water connections. NOTE: In practical terms, an active connection = a water bill.

Instead of slogging through fluoridation campaigns city by city, risking a repeat of the defeats of 1952, the Sonoma County Department of Health Services (DHS) decided to make its play for fluoridation through the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA).

In a classic case of overreach, the DHS plan attempts to gather up, not only Santa Rosa and Petaluma, but all the smaller cities and water districts served by SCWA, communities that don’t fall under the California fluoridation mandate, and could not otherwise be pressured to fluoridate. In Sonoma County, only the cities of Santa Rosa and Petaluma have 10,000 or more active water connections, and both cities have other legal grounds on which to dispute the applicability of the state mandate .

WHO DECIDES ABOUT FLUORIDATION?
Sonoma County Board of Supervisors does double duty as the governing  board of SCWA. Because the proposed fluoridating agency is SCWA, a water wholesaler with only 156 active connections, the California fluoridation mandate doesn’t apply, so the decision whether or not to fluoridate SCWA water is entirely at the discretion of our five Sonoma County Supervisors.

The DHS’ plan does not require or permit a Sonoma County residents to vote on the proposed water fluoridation plan.

Before making such a big decision, the Board of Supervisors needs full information. Unfortunately the Board delegated responsibility for information gathering to DHS, including commissioning the fluoridation reports.

Because water fluoridation is one of the Four Pillars of US Public Health policy, the lead on the project is the Sonoma County Public Health Officer, currently Karen Milman, MD, MPH. The proposed fluoridation project has the active and unquestioning support of DHS staff from bottom to top.

DHS CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Because Sonoma County water fluoridation is a DHS campaign, DHS has an insurmountable conflict of interest.

It would have taken exceptional integrity on the part of our County Health Officer to have insured that the Board receive full and impartial information, or to have suggested that DHS recuse itself.

The Board of Supervisors has requested, and Sonoma County residents have paid for have paid for the following fluoridation-related reports: Sonoma County Smiles Report, as well as studies on fluoridation engineering logistics, fluoridation costs (and potential cost savings), and potential fluoridation environmental risks.