Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

HappilyhiketheHump t1_it9bsvx wrote

Kendall is a good guy, but he needed to go after making unilateral decisions with a town’s drinking water.

Bigger question. After 9/11 and all the federal money dumped into states and cities to protect vital Infrastructure, how can one rando just screw with the water and the town and the state have no damn clue?

WTF is going on with state and local governments?

−49

lapsedmember t1_it9hi45 wrote

I would like to inform you that my grandfather Fowler Curtis stopped the federal government from putting fluorine in the water tower in fluorine county Il. The one place in the country that already had too much fluorine in the water. Back then there were no tests to see how much fluorine was in the water or what other chemicals can react with fluorine to form toxic chemicals. He described the process as taking a double hand full out of the bucket and dropping it in the tank. It should be obvious that this could result in a lethal dose to some. If you want to know what really went on back then you can contact the Hardin County Independent which is owned by my cousins or the fluorine museum where my cousins volunteer at.

−74

daveashaw t1_ita0se5 wrote

Ice cream. Mandrake--kids' ice cream. That's how the hard-core commie works.

−12

Twombls t1_ita2fwk wrote

Good. People like this should not be allowed to be public servants. As someone who was born here these type of people are one of the most embarrassing things about the state for me. These are the people that give vermont its stereotypes

45

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_ita3u6t wrote

Why wasn't he charged, this is a dereliction of duty that put peoples heath at risk? His irresponsible actions have surely had a negative impact of the health of the citizens that he was supposed to be protecting.

There should be consequences for what he did. Is he still on the select board? Why on earth is he being allowed to still hold public office? WTF?

32

Sakred t1_ita92bs wrote

Replying to mycophdstudent (#173,112)

Most people don't have any sort of logical consistency in their beliefs, nor do they think things through. They tend to just accept the status quo and think anything not that is bad and wrong.

−38

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_ita9fjw wrote

Replying to vtjohnhurt (#173,521)

This is gross negligence of a public employee that harmed the health of the citizens that he was charged with protecting. He lied to the people of this town for a decade about his negligent decision to cause them health injuries, which he was clearly not qualified to do. This is a dereliction of his duty to the public office his town entrusted him with.

15

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_itaamsq wrote

Replying to Sakred (#173,827)

It is right in the article, which you apparently didn't read

"...in the recommended amounts, fluoride in water decreases cavities or tooth
decay by about 25%, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control"

10

vtjohnhurt t1_itaea4t wrote

Replying to ThisistheInfiniteIs (#173,844)

Are those offenses anywhere in the criminal code of justice? Maybe somebody can sue him civilly for damages.

If he had put poison in the water, he would have broken the law. The water he treated was biologically safe.not contaminated.

Dereliction of Duty might be part of military code of justice.

−13

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_itafuo4 wrote

Replying to vtjohnhurt (#174,349)

He lied to his entire town for a decade about the tooth decay protection program that he was charged with maintaining. He made a conscious decision over and over for 10 years to lie to his fellow citizens and tampered with the dose and put his entire town at a significantly heightened risk of a very serious disease.

He was in charge of a vital health program that the town was expecting was being taken care of and paying for with their tax dollars.

He recklessly and selfishly chose to lie about what he was doing to get away with it. He defrauded the entire town of this health and safety program. That is a criminal act.

It is clearly a decade fraud, with health injury resulting.

16

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_itag8c4 wrote

Replying to vtjohnhurt (#174,349)

How about choosing to practice medicine without a license for starters.

He chose to ignore the dose recommended by state and federal health professionals and substitute his own, then he lied about it.

8

cshellcujo t1_itas23l wrote

This NIH metastudy is somewhat interesting to read. The data that was used to justify water fluoridation has some questionable origins to begin with. The article then goes on to mention that fluoride is only effective topically, not systemically. It ranges significantly per community how much is in the water, and theres absolutely no way to regulate how much individuals are “dosing” fluoride daily. They use doses of 5mg/day to treat hyperthyroidism, and at 0.8ppm-1.2ppm (~0.8-1.2mg/L) an adult can easily consume more than that.

Just some food for thought. The intent might not be some global cabals shot at dimming down the average IQ, but that doesn’t mean they’re right or that the practice isn’t outdated/doesn’t need revision.

−9

Kink4202 t1_itasat3 wrote

He should have been arrested or at least sued by the townspeople.

4

HayMomWatchThis t1_itasunj wrote

But has he been charged? It’s my understanding that removing the fluoride caused damage to the water system. the fluoride as well as being good for your teeth is also an anticorrosive. lowering the fluoride directly caused wear and tear on the municipal water system. He should be charged for the damage he caused.

−2

[deleted] t1_itavjz8 wrote

I don’t get why people are so worried about fluoride when what we really need to be worried about in our water is dihydrogen monoxide. If you breath it, it can kill you! Get it out of our water now!

24

thoughtfillednorth t1_itazo7g wrote

If he was paid to be a servant of those who he should have protected, he needs to pay back the funds give. To him. He didn't do the job he was apid tondo.

We call that taxpayer fraud.

7

cpujockey t1_itb6qhl wrote

I'm kinda curious about this.

Seems fucked he'd like to his town about how the water is treated. On the other hand, I know that flouride in water can fuck with things like:

Making water based wood stain

Some fish don't like it

Then again I don't have much knowledge on these matters other than that. I'm not a denier of the positive effects of flouride, I know that in some scenarios it's not ideal. I think chlorine is likely more dangerous than flouride.

0

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_itbfcy8 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#175,371)

> fluoride in water systems is an anti-corrosive agent

What?? Fluoride is not anti-corrosive it IS corrosive! It eats pipes makes lead leak from old solder joints and on and on. Health benefits aside it even eats titanium. Please stop with the blatant disinfo.

7

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itbgfb6 wrote

Replying to HayMomWatchThis (#175,354)

Per the CDC, there is no evidence to support the anti-corrosive selling point. Fluoride is as corrosive to water treatment systems as other salts, sulfates and chlorides. However, there are additional additives to the precipitated (with sulfuric acid) fluoride, that will reduce the corrosion caused by the fluoride compound.

4

YOurAreWr0ng t1_itbnrd5 wrote

Replying to mycophdstudent (#174,135)

A low IQ response would be railing against fluoride. I bet you think the world is flat, trump is president, the moon landing is fake, there’s microchips in vaccines, and 5G will hurt you as well. Am I right on a few of those you loon?

21

LJS6348 t1_itbnt06 wrote

Wow! You are all fighting to keep being poisoned. Go look for the studies indicating that fluoride is beneficial in a live person. Not teeth in a jar.

−11

jaylaxel t1_itbr39p wrote

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/13/212

Vermont Las: Neglect of duty by public officers punishable by maximum 1 year and $1,000 fine. Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 3006.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue of fluoride pros and cons, deception and gross negligence occurred. Why is Essex waiting on resignations rather than at least forcing retirement from all govt. positions?

27

BabyBundtCakes t1_itc028b wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#177,569)

So we use our water to brush our teeth, and ingesting it doesn't have any harmful outcomes. If you read the article, one of the people who sounded the alarm was a dentist who saw people from a single town coming in with tooth decay issues at a greater rate than everyone else. He harmed people for years, your teeth are extremely important. I don't even get why so many people are hung up on that specific thing, when no studies show harm from ingesting normal amounts (remember, if you ingest higher than your UI of vitamins you can leach calcium from your bones and get ulcers, too much anything, even natural things we need can cause harm, so this is not flouride specific.) We don't need to show ingesting it is positive, we already know it's neutral and that using it to brush teeth is a net positive for the entire community. flouride isn't a vitamin, you're not taking a One A Day here.

My best guess is that this question "is flouride safe to ingest? Show me a study!" Is a direct feed of propaganda, since all of the deniers are asking it in exactly the same way. Mainly because there are many many studies already available that show you that flouride levels in town water systems are regulated to be under that amount already. This man did know that, and he damaged people's teeth, he damaged children and teenagers teeth for the rest of their lives without them or their parents knowing and you're here making weird false claims to try and justify this. You should, and the others, should really evaluate why you think it's appropriate to lie to people and give them life-long issues that impact every aspect of their health. Eating, using your teeth, having healthy teeth, is far far more important than this ridiculous assertion that we need to learn something that doesn't make sense and is already proven

8

mycophdstudent t1_itc2dg5 wrote

Replying to YOurAreWr0ng (#177,145)

You're laughable.

You' respond with such predictability, as if you're a programmed to make a scripted response abs play the same five notes back whenever confronted with a dissenting point of view and say  "Oh that persona thinks wrong therefore bah bah trump.... bah bah Jan 6... bah bah election... bah bah flat earther..."

I've never voted for Trump but I'll consider it now because the left is full if assholes like you.

−36

mycophdstudent t1_itc3mri wrote

Replying to cpujockey (#176,012)

I can almost hear it now being told by the same people that "iF u dON't wAN't lIthiUm IN yoUr WaTeR SuPPLy yOu mUSt Be A TRuMp vOtEr aNd ANTi-ScIeNcE AnD wEaR A TIn FOiL HAt and wANt pEoPle tO DiE!"

−8

BabyBundtCakes t1_itc7816 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#178,474)

You said you are an engineer and bragged about how smart you are, so I assumed you know how to do research. I'm not going to link every study out there. They are there and available. They do show high levels can be toxic, as with anything else. They also show appropriate levels save communities from tooth decay and the long-term issues those carry. I had faith that you know how to determine if a source is valid, and could do that on your own time. You can even go talk to a dentist and ask them for studies! They are a great resource, and I bet many of them would love to give you that information. I bet even a PCP office could point you in the direction of studies about the dangers and benefits of flouride.

Here's one for example, that explains how appropriate levels have helped and caused no harm. You being an engineer doesn't mean you aren't susceptible to disinformation campaigns. All of us are vulnerable to that sort of messaging, intelligence has nothing to do with it. Ignorance does, not being cognizant that there are people on TV and selling newspapers that have a vested interest in convincing people to harm their own communities and weaken their safety. Creating a bunch of tooth decay where none need be because you are not willing to read multiple sources on your own time and discern which ones are valid and which aren't, is a very weird behavior, to be honest with you.

Flourosis is a real issue, and it naturally occurs in waterways. We also use methods to control that. If we didn't have studies we wouldnt know that information either. We also know the lowest level possible to not cause harm and reduce dental issues in entire communities.

"To minimize fluoride toxicity, the concentration of fluoride in drinking water has been controlled to attain the recommended level of 0.8~1.0 ppm (13)"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6195894/

4

BabyBundtCakes t1_itc8rvy wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#178,682)

Ah, so you're a troll. The study I linked showed multiple countries with 40-50% reduction in tooth caries and you've linked to a publication called the Durango Herald.

Have a good day. I hope that other folks who read this don't try to harm our communities with disinformation like this. I'm sorry that you don't seem to be able to understand balance.

(ETA: the guy who wrote the editorial is a gym owner in that area who sells a lifestyle fitness book called Wellness Toolbox. He has 28 years as a fitness instructor. His biography says nothing about him being a dentist or flouride expert of any kind.)

6

Sakred t1_itcubjf wrote

Replying to Goodunnn (#178,817)

"The average loss in IQ was reported as a standardized weighted mean difference of 0.45, which would be approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores with a standard deviation of 15.* Some studies suggested that even slightly increased fluoride exposure could be toxic to the brain. Thus, children in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas. The children studied were up to 14 years of age, but the investigators speculate that any toxic effect on brain development may have happened earlier, and that the brain may not be fully capable of compensating for the toxicity."

​

​

What's funny about that?

2

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itdfo2a wrote

Replying to ThisistheInfiniteIs (#173,844)

On investigation, it is clear that the morally derided and stripped employee reported his data all the way up the chain, including sourcing quality concerns and ever present plus emerging data on neurotoxicity and diminished capacity in children. Should they all go to prison? Why just one lowly head rolling? Because he articulated poorly while being verbally attacked and the mob mentality fed into it? Because he looks different, even though his employment record over 37 years with Richmond is sparkling? Where is the real accountability?

0

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itdh381 wrote

Replying to ThisistheInfiniteIs (#174,503)

But he didn't lie. He stumbled over his words and made a fool of himself while being verbally attacked. He also followed scientific practice after properly reporting his findings up the chain, repeatedly. His findings were supply chain issues, quality issues, health concerns. Had he stepped out publicly on his own, he would have lost his job for doing so. Initially I also thought he had Breached Public Trust and operated beyond his scope. However, investigation reveals that he did not do this in a vacuum.

0

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itdi2xk wrote

Replying to lapsedmember (#171,712)

This is good data, shouted into an angry mob with burning sticks. I think most people here simply don't think critically about why we really have fluoride in our water or where it comes from. They probably think you are just misspelling the word by mentioning fluorine. 100 ups to ya, lapsed-.

2

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_itdj0jn wrote

Replying to Electrical-Bed8577 (#181,614)

No, he lied to his town for a decade. They trusted him to maintain an important health and safety program and instead he made medical decisions for them, despite not have a medical degree, and destroyed their right to benefit from it.

It's both a clear case of fraud by a public employee and an example of someone practicing medicine without a license.

This fool needs to be charged for both of these serious offences.

2

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itdsuyr wrote

Replying to ThisistheInfiniteIs (#174,470)

Since 2011. He reported his concern up the chain, regarding supply chain and quality and necessity, based on current commercial and publicly available fluoride product data and emerging scientific data on fluorine products. Those who he reported to then reported up to the state. He was not a public figure and did not report to the public. This is a systemic issue.

1

ThisistheInfiniteIs t1_itdtsrp wrote

Replying to Electrical-Bed8577 (#182,373)

"It was far less than 10 years. He reported his concern up the chain, regarding supply chain and quality and necessity, based on current commercial and publicly available fluoride product data and emerging scientific data on fluorine products. Those who he reported to then reported up to the state. He was not a public figure and did not report to the public. This is a systemic issue."

You didn't even bother to read the story apparently, he made a medical decision that he was not qualified to do, which harmed the residents he was in charge of protecting and lied, over and over again for a decade about it:

"Richmond water superintendent Kendall Chamberlin disclosed in his five-page resignation letter, submitted Monday, that fluoride levels have not been in the state-recommended range for over a decade — instead of nearly four years, as the state had recently disclosed."

0

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_iteuyyp wrote

Replying to vtjohnhurt (#173,521)

vtjohn-, it's good to see that you're diligent in your truth finding, unlike the interesting experiment here of down thumbers. This (what you stated as reported in NYT and several other outlets) is corroborated by his superior(s) statements, claiming ignorance of the prescribed values for what amounts to their subscription to the state program in order to gain federal(?) funding.

2

mycophdstudent t1_itn4b9q wrote

Replying to SheridanWyoming (#179,484)

You're an example of a bad faith actor which destroyed what the left used to be. The left used to be anti-war, pro-freedom, pro-1A with a large dose of gov distrust but you're anti-country, pro-war, pro-authoritarianism, pro-discord, pro-censorship. You made a slander against me because I voiced doubt about the value in medicating my soup, bathwater and laundry, and rather than making a sound argument as to why my soup and laundry and bathwater needs fluoridation when fluoride application is topical and widely available in toothpaste and mouthwash, you just parroted slanders.

3

SheridanWyoming t1_itn5eyy wrote

Replying to mycophdstudent (#208,486)

I think you're confusing me with a different poster? I was just saying that people being mean on the internet isn't a great way to decide who you're voting for. Imho, voting based on policy is a better idea.

2

lapsedmember t1_itnjdvp wrote

In 1960 Union Carbide gaseous diffusion released 5000 and 7000 pounds of uraniumhexafloride into the atmosphere and Didn't tell any one so we could take iodine. My dad Everett Ramsey didn't know in spite of the fact he worked there and had a Q security clearance. That is where the fluorine came from in the beginning that they put into the water and yes it was radioactive. Contact the Paducah Sun for more information. You are working on 60 year old standards before they started putting fluorine in everything. Teflon pans get recycled and the Teflon vaporizes. Freon goes into the atmosphere and get bombarded by cosmic rays at 100000000 degrees. I don't know how much fluorine are in people which means that 99.9975 of the rest of don't know either. I do know no matter what the chemical some one will have trouble getting rid of it. These people will have brittle bones and teeth but don't know the cause. If they are diagnosed they will be told to buy bottled water for the rest of their life.

2

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itnli6p wrote

Fluoride is not defined by our Government as a medicine, not a drug, but a mineral, -thisistheinf-. Fluoride is not approved by the FDA. The US Food and Drug Administration does Not govern states water supplies. The FDA does govern bottled water for retail sale and in April of this year finalized the

maximum allowed fluoride additive of .07mg/ltr.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/04/20/2022-08273/beverages-bottled-water

1

mycophdstudent t1_itnm8qw wrote

Apologies for my mistake. I wish you good health and much happiness.

1

Electrical-Bed8577 t1_itnoheo wrote

Replying to lapsedmember (#210,111)

Fluoride and Brittle bones: osteoporosis, osteoarthritis, fluerosis; also other neurogenic aches, lowered cognition, kidney disease, prostate and bladder cancer, possibly sleep disorders relevant to the pineal gland (needs further controlled studies), hypothyroidism (for which iodine comes into play), etc., but there is little news of this, as the big business and trading of what was once a byproduct of manufacturing, rolls on. Had i not looked it up, I would have happily gone along guzzling the sweetwater.

2