Tonight, unless something drastically changes, the roughly six-month debate on fluoridation – which is only the latest episode in a half-century saga in Davis on this issue – will end tonight. Mayor Pro Tem Dan Wolk came out in favor of fluoridation early in the process, but unless something changes he does not have three votes, and may not even have a second vote.
Truth be told, when the issue emerged, I thought I would end up supporting fluoridation. I grew up in a community with fluoridated water and, to be quite blunt, it was not a big deal in the least. My perception of the anti-fluoridation folks was painted by images of the 1950s, where the John Birch Society railed against fluoridation, arguing that it would make it easier for the communists to put us under their control.
But over the course of the debate and studying the issue, I have come to a different viewpoint. I still do not buy into the freedom issue. I am not sold that at the levels of concentration proposed here it poses either a health or environmental risk – it appears that both concerns arise at much higher concentrations than what is proposed here.
At the end of the day, I think there is a segment of society that is falling through the cracks of getting proper medical, dental, and even nutritional care, and that is an issue I care deeply about and believe desperately needs to be addressed.
The question then comes to how cost effective fluoridation is, and how much it is likely to impact the group of people I care about the most.
At a two million dollar startup cost with a few hundred thousand a year – if fluoridation were proven effective at reducing tooth decay, I would be more likely to favor it. However, looking at the comparative statics – very basic level statistical analysis, looking at the graphs on tooth decay in communities with and without fluoridation – I do not see the big bang for the buck in terms of overall decay reduction from fluoridation.
Looking anecdotally at the group that would be targeted, Alan Pryor’s op-ed is somewhat convincing. He argues that vast quantities of fluoride will be released into the environment – he calculates about 12 tons.
Of that, he argues that “most people drink or consume only about two quarts of water per day.”
Two quarts of water per day. But that is probably a high number. I look at what my kids drink and it is not tap water – they are mostly drinking milk or juice. I would say it is pretty rare that they would drink tap water. So my kids would get no fluoridated water at all.
Public health concerns are that kids are primarily drinking juice or sugary soda, not water. So the low income targets, much like my kids, are probably not getting any of the fluoridated water.
This kind of reasoning has led me away from the idea that fluoridation is the way to go here. Opponents of fluoridation argue that fluoride supplements are already available both through the Affordable Care Act (if it actually gets funded, given the battle in Washington – and this is not an invitation to discuss that) and through Medi-Cal.
Our concern is that many kids are not getting that treatment. This issue started to resonate with me when our then six-year-old nephew moved in with a mouth full of decaying teeth because he was not brushing his teeth, not getting dental treatment, and certainly not getting fluoride supplements.
There is a growing segment of our community in a similar position. Providing the treatment is not enough. We have kids in this community whose only food in a school day is the school-provided breakfast and lunch.
I have joined Councilmember Brett Lee in his examination of mobile dental vans, which could go directly to school sites and make sure students have the proper dental treatment.
We are not reinventing the wheel here – there are programs in other communities that deliver dental services through the use of mobile dental vans to outlying areas of counties, targeting children who are low-income and whose parents are uninsured.
One such program operates in San Luis Obispo County and Northern Santa Barbara County, through the Community Health Center located in Nipomo, just north of Santa Maria.
Here they operate on an annual budget of $200,000 to $300,000. But because they target mainly children with Medi-Cal or Denti-Cal, if half of the children have Medi-Cal, they can be fully funded through federal grants from various organizations and charities.
Similar programs could work here in Davis by creating a mobile dental clinic that works alongside a community clinic such as CommuniCare.
One estimate of the cost would be $250,000 to $500,000. If we could get part of that funded through grants and through CommuniCare, the rest could be covered by funding that would have gone to fluoridating the water.
Obviously, we cannot directly convert the $2 million proposed from the Enterprise fund to pay for these treatments, but there are funding options available.
Fluoridation opponent Alan Pryor was supportive of the idea, but did say, “I do not believe the citizens of Davis should be held hostage on the question of drinking water fluoridation. That is, if we don’t fluoridate then we have to have a mobile clinic. That presupposes that fluoridation is effective at reducing caries without adverse side-effects. I do not believe that is the case at all.”
The alternative proposal has drawn little support from those favoring fluoridation. It is difficult to understand their trepidation with taking a middle course that will be much more politically feasible.
Our calculations remain – we do not see three votes on the council and there is perhaps as little as one vote, Dan Wolk, for fluoridation. Moreover, even if the council shifted course, we believe the matter would quickly be put on the ballot and voted down, but not before there was another six-month fight that split our community apart.
The best way to get fluoride and dental treatment to at-risk children is to look into ways to fund mobile dental vans. In fact, at this point, it is the only way.
The sooner the public health advocates recognize this, the sooner they can be part of the solution for treating dental decay rather attempting to jam fluoridation down the throats of a community that appears skeptical, at best, and divided sharply, at worst.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
[quote]We have kids in this community whose only food in a school day is the school provided breakfast and lunch.[/quote]
Prove it.
I am deeply disappointed at what I see as an either / or mentality that has been engendered around this debate. The proponents of fluoridation have been portrayed again and again as wanting to apply a band aid. And many people from the non medical community have been quick to tell us how we could solve the problem of dental decay if we only….pick your simplified solution:
1) educate people
2) take away children’s sugary beverages
3) get people to be responsible about getting their kids to the dentist
4) would only provide adequate care ourselves
What these comments completely ignore is that the medical community and public health community are all very much involved in all of these activities already and we are still seeing substantial rates of dental decay.
I do not know anyone in the health community who does not already engage in many activities to promote preventive health care. I am sure that all would welcome dental outreach vans…..if they were to be considered along with fluoridation. None of us see fluoridation as a panacea. All of us see it as part of a comprehensive approach to a painful, costly and common condition that affects not only the targeted population of poor children, but has possibility of benefiting the entire population. What you have is a rare event. Virtual unanimity of the health care community around a single issue. We are by nature a fractious and contentious bunch who spend our lives reading and debating the merits of scientific literature. This kind of unanimity would not occur if there were not overwhelming evidence to support the benefits of fluoridation.
I would welcome Brett’s van proposal in combination with water fluoridation. As a stand alone measure what it represents is a measure which will affect only children, will have similar if not higher costs than fluoridation,
and will not have a steady, guaranteed funding stream. What neither you or Brett are mentioning is that grant funding is quite unpredictable and even the most effective programs wax and wane with the ability to actually obtain the funding. At this point, it is speculation that funding would be available either for start up or maintenance of such a program, not pencilled out fact.
As for “jamming something down the throats of a community”, this has been true for virtually every public health measure that has ever been undertaken. Despite overwhelming scientific evidence for the safety and efficacy of such measures as chlorinating the drinking water, immunizations, preventing exposure to second hand cigarette smoke, each has brought public outcry and people trying to block these measures. Just because there is a concerted protest from groups that would block any kind of public action, or who just plain do not believe in the concept of public health, does not mean that our leaders should abandon effective public health measures. The trajectory of these measures is fairly consistent over time. There is huge outcry in the beginning, and then the majority of people realize as you note that the measure taken ” is no big deal” as the imagined horrible outcomes fail to materialize. It then becomes the standard, and reasonable people are left wondering what the fuss was about.
[quote]It then becomes the standard, and reasonable people are left wondering what the fuss was about. [/quote]
LOL, so they’re reasonable people as long as they see it the same way you do?
[quote]LOL, so they’re reasonable people as long as they see it the same way you do?[/quote]
No, but would you block proven effective immunizations because a prominent elected official says they cause mental retardation ? Maybe you would. I prefer to rely on the peer reviewed literature for my information, and if you use Western medicine in any form, you will be better off if your doctor does also.
Well, be prepared, you’re going to run into a whole flock of unreasonable people at tonight’s council meeting.
Medwoman: “No, but would you block proven effective immunizations because a prominent elected official says they cause mental retardation ?”
You are conflating two drastically different things. Immunizations are carefully studied in advance of use, with analysis of the proper, effective dose, and are carefully administered on an individual basis to ensure that the patient only receives the safe dosage that they need.
Fluoridation by design is mass medication with none of the safeguards that are common for immunization.
Acting as if they are equivalent simply destroys your own argument.
Medwoman: At its core, politics is and always has been the art of the possible. Right now, I don’t count to two let alone three votes on council and believe that even if there were three votes, that the community would reject it after a bitterly contentious campaign.
So why not do what’s possible now, which I believe Mobile Vans are, and spend time educating the public. There is no reason the issue cannot be revisited at a later point.
Medwoman wrote:
> No, but would you block proven effective immunizations
> because a prominent elected official says they cause
> mental retardation ?
Quite a few Davis parents seem to believe that immunizations cause retardation or autism (If Jenny McCarthy says it is true it must be true). I recently saw a sheet with the number of kids at each Davis public school that are not immunized and it blew my mind that so many parents here are so stupid. Years ago Dr. Dean Edell reported that West Marin had a higher percentage of kids that were not immunized than anywhere else in America. It makes sense that a guy who lives in a hut and smokes pot while making candles with his wife to sell at craft shows on weekends will not get his kids immunized, but I was surprised to see so many Davis parents doing the same thing…
[quote]What these comments completely ignore is that the medical community and public health community are all very much involved in all of these activities already and we are still seeing substantial rates of dental decay. [/quote]
I am a member of the medical community, yet I have seen no attempt to take away sugary beverages from children despite the fact that this is the leading contributor to obesity and dental decay. We will need public policy to make this happen. Are you saying that you are interested in getting behind this? We will continue to see rates of dental decay and obesity rise until we begin to address this problem in a meaningful way.
Do we have any definitive statistics of the number of Davis residents that actually need this doctor prescription of industrial-grade fluoride in their drinking, cleaning and gardening water?
Frankly
[quote]Do we have any definitive statistics of the number of Davis residents that actually need this doctor prescription of industrial-grade fluoride in their drinking, cleaning and gardening water? [/quote]
Don’t hold your breath Frankly, you’ll probably get those stats the same time David proves to us how many kids only get the 2 school meals per day and nothing else.
[quote]I have seen no attempt to take away sugary beverages from children despite the fact that this is the leading contributor to obesity and dental decay. We will need public policy to make this happen. Are you saying that you are interested in getting behind this? We will continue to see rates of dental decay and obesity rise until we begin to address this problem in a meaningful way. [/quote]
Here we go……
” There is no reason the issue cannot be revisited at a later point. “
Sure there is . Look at the extremes growth opponents have gone to to defeat any improvement of infrastructure in Davis. The cost of the water project has already been exacerbated by political and fiscal wrangling. I have to tone down the reality of this water war to sell it to my publisher as farce. The health threats claimed by opponents to fluoridation fly in the face of all responsible science. The Vanguard holds no small responsibility for scuttling this whole project, should it fail.
Biddlin ;>)/
“Mayor Pro Tem Dan Wolk came out in favor of fluoridation early in the process, but unless something changes he does not have three votes, and may not even have a second vote.”
Poor council is going to have to sit through all those public comments anyway….hope public shows them some mercy.
OK, I am going to be what some will find really ugly. Taking away sugary junk drinks is the parents job. And if the money spent on the expensive sugary junk drinks was instead spent on fluoride drops or the like, there would be a surplus of $$ left over.
[quote]I would welcome Brett’s van proposal in combination with water fluoridation. As a stand alone measure what it represents is a measure which will affect only children, will have similar if not higher costs than fluoridation,
and will not have a steady, guaranteed funding stream.[/quote]
What is the steady, guaranteed funding stream for fluoridation of the water?
They think it will be covered by the water rates already calculated and expected to be put into effect with little supplementation. In other words, they’ll charge us for it.
Let’s be honest here. If there are any measurable numbers of poor Davis families incapable to ensure little Johnny and little Suzy brush their teeth and get access to all that free dental care they are entitled to – and I doubt there are many – they would tend to be poor and uneducated immigrants from south of the border. They would come from a culture where they didn’t have access to 1000+ reasonably-priced personal dental hygiene products, they would not be able to speak or read English, they would not be connected to the community in ways that they could get information and discover the parental norms of behavior expected in this country.
They would be imported codependency subjects for Davis liberals.
And if they were not here, Davis liberals would have to focus on the other remaining smaller minority of needy to satiate their need to save people to remain validated.
Those would be broken families and families with one or more parent owning substance abuse/addiction problems.
So, one way to look at this is that the flood of immigrants from south of the border that Davis liberals support has caused a lack of resources that would otherwise be directed to other needy families, and has caused liberals to overreach in their attempts to save everything lacking the resources to do so.
And before I get to hear all the claims of racism and xenophobia, it would not matter if those immigrants were poor and uneducated white Eastern Europeans. The simple fact is that this demand to put fluoride in the water is another of a long list of impacts/costs from our out of control and broken immigration policies.
Liberals love it… it provides them subjects to lock in a codependency relationship that keeps them in political power, and fills they day with meaning. Business also loves the cheap labor.
Fluoride in the water just adds another to the long list of tangible and intangible costs associated with the US getting inundated with millions and millions of poor and uneducated immigrants.
But since they are here and will stay here, we need to break this cycle of liberal-saving codependency that keeps coming up with harebrained schemes for population-damaging quick fixes, and start putting significant effort into assimilation. Learn to speak and read English. Come out of the shadows and learn how American parents and children are expected to perform and behave. Then we can focus our limited savers resources on those families that require real help.
“We have kids in this community whose only food in a school day is the school provided breakfast and lunch.”
“Prove it.”
When I taught in Woodland I saw hungry kids everyday. I remember one kid who ate orange peels. Another time i remember the faculty and staff pitching in to get a kid a pair of shoes because the ones she had were falling apart. California has a high level of poverty among children. If you think there aren’t poor, hungry children in Davis you need to get out more.
“I am a member of the medical community, yet I have seen no attempt to take away sugary beverages from children despite the fact that this is the leading contributor to obesity and dental decay.”
When Arnold was governor he signed a law that got the soda out of our schools. A few years later we are seeing a decline in the rates for childhood obesity. Whether or not these are leading causes of tooth decay your assertion that nothing is being done against sugary drinks is in error.
medwoman wrote (emphasis mine)[quote][b][i]All of us[/i][/b] see it as part of a comprehensive approach to a painful, costly and common condition that affects not only the targeted population of poor children, but has possibility of benefiting the entire population. What you have is a rare event. [b][i]Virtual unanimity of the health care community[/i][/b] around a single issue. We are by nature a fractious and contentious bunch who spend our lives reading and debating the merits of scientific literature. This kind of unanimity would not occur if there were not [b][i]overwhelming evidence to support the benefits of fluoridation[/i][/b]. [/quote]
No, there is not “virtual unanimity of the health care community” around this. And there is absolutely not “overwhelming evidence to support the benefits of fluoridation.” Quite the contrary, as I have pointed out again and again. The evidence says that water fluoridation does not prevent dental decay. The evidence says that fluoridation has associated health risks.
[quote] Just because there is a concerted protest from groups that would block any kind of public action, or who just plain do not believe in the concept of public health, does not mean that our leaders should abandon effective public health measures.[/quote]
Again and again and again we tell you that water fluoridation does not prevent dental decay, but it does have proven and associated health risks. And you respond that we fluoride opponents belong to a group of people that would block any kind of public action, or we just plain do not believe in the concept of public health. This is an inaccurate and insulting comment.
My kid never gets juice or sugary drinks. She drinks mostly water and some non-fat organic milk. Juice is not good for kids. Too much sugar. Bad for their weight and their teeth.
” The Vanguard holds no small responsibility for scuttling this whole project, should it fail.”
even if that were true – which is close to preposterous – why is that a bad thing?
“Davis liberals”
there you go again
” If you think there aren’t poor, hungry children in Davis you need to get out more.”
we have four title one schools, i wonder if growth izzue, really knows much beyond his cul de sac in wildhorse
Toad:
[quote]When I taught in Woodland I saw hungry kids everyday. I remember one kid who ate orange peels. Another time i remember the faculty and staff pitching in to get a kid a pair of shoes because the ones she had were falling apart. California has a high level of poverty among children. If you think there aren’t poor, hungry children in Davis you need to get out more. [/quote]
Toad, David said in OUR community. So Toad, are you saying that some kids in Davis have a school lunch on Friday and don’t eat again until school breakfast on Monday?
[quote]We have kids in this community whose [b]only food [/b]in a school day is the school provided breakfast and lunch.[/quote]
“So Toad, are you saying that some kids in Davis have a school lunch on Friday and don’t eat again until school breakfast on Monday?”
i’m saying it. used to work with families in davis. again, i think you are naive about you’re own community beyond your wealthy neighborhood.
B. Nice
[quote]Poor council is going to have to sit through all those public comments anyway….hope public shows them some mercy. [/quote]
Oh the poor council having to sit through listening to the people.
[quote]And if the money spent on the expensive sugary junk drinks was instead spent on fluoride drops or the like, there would be a surplus of $$ left over.[/quote]
Or if the money the federal government spent on corn subsidize, so sugary drinks weren’t so cheap, there would be a surplus of money left over for say mobil dental vans…
[i]The U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) Wednesday released “Apples to Twinkies,” a review of agricultural subsidies that shows that since 1995, approximately 16.9 billion dollars in taxpayer money have gone toward supplementing four of the country’s most common food additives – corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, corn starch and soy oils.[/i]
“Oh the poor council having to sit through listening to the people. “
if the people have nothing new to say, then yes, it becomes tedious and repetitive. i’m now interested in what the five members of council have to say, i know what both sides have to say.
[quote]if the people have nothing new to say, then yes, it becomes tedious and repetitive. i’m now interested in what the five members of council have to say, i know what both sides have to say. [/quote]
Haven’t you and others said in the past that if you don’t go to the council meetings and speak up then you have no right to complain? That the council pays a lot of credence to how many speak out on an issue and how many show up for a cause? That the council is swayed by public input?
The Vanguard has consistently sided with the non-expert, non-science, anti-spending,anti-growth,pro-referendum, anti-growth crowd. He may choose to ignore the realities, scientific and political, in favour of his own interests or beliefs. The culture of the blogosphere is rich breeding ground for blatherskites, numpties and hornswogglers. David is too easily distracted and persuaded by them, giving them tacit endorsement, while pleading objectivity and fairness. He is no more objective in this instance than in his vendetta against the firefighter’s union.
What is most troubling in all of this is his, and others, abusive treatment of ERM, and the people who did the real work, while he threw bricks from the sideline.
Biddlin ;>)/
“Haven’t you and others said in the past that if you don’t go to the council meetings and speak up then you have no right to complain? That the council pays a lot of credence to how many speak out on an issue and how many show up for a cause? That the council is swayed by public input? “
yeah. and on this issue, i don’t think it’s going to matter, fluoridation is going down.
[quote]Haven’t you and others said in the past that if you don’t go to the council meetings and speak up then you have no right to complain? That the council pays a lot of credence to how many speak out on an issue and how many show up for a cause? That the council is swayed by public input?[/quote]
I agree with these sentiments, but I wish people would use the “ditto” option more (if someone has already made your point get up to the mic and say I agree with John Doe’s statement, if you have something new to add add it”, When multiply people get up and all speak for 3 minutes saying the exact same thing it gets tedious and becomes a waste of everyone at the meetings time.
also i find it offensive that people care more about an issue like this than a host of others.
[quote]also i find it offensive that people care more about an issue like this than a host of others. [/quote]
As I’m sure others find some of your “issues” thaat you care about offensive.
[quote]we have four title one schools, i wonder if growth izzue, really knows much beyond his cul de sac in wildhorse[/quote]
And that just means there are [u]enough[/u] low income families going to the school to qualify it for Title 1 Funding. All of our schools have kids living at or below the poverty line.
Show me the kids that only eat at Davis schools and never have food at home. Otherwise I don’t believe you.
[i]”Davis liberals”
there you go again[/i]
DP – I get that you and other Davis Liberals identify with your ideology like others connect with religion… and that it stings when someone else tries to tell you what is wrong with your ideology-religion… because it also says something about your identity.
But if the shoe fits you have to wear it.
If it does not fit, then please explain it to me.
The ideas and positions coming from those identified as having a liberal mindset are a major conundrum to me. I see long-term damage resulting from these ideas pushed by left-leaning people that I consider to be highly intelligent. I would be willing to debate these ideas on their merit, and I attempt to do so but then we get to this blocking and defensive response of taking things personal and attacking my character.
For example…
I don’t care about children and poor people.
I am a racist.
I am xenophobic.
I am homophobic.
I only want people like me to benefit from public policy.
With their knee-jerk emotional and attacking response to debate of incontinence fact and opposing opinion, there is nothing left than to dig into the psychology of liberals as a method to dissect and illuminate their true motivations and agenda. If it is unwanted and uncomfortable, then see the list above and work to clean up your act and be open to all opinions.
[quote]I see long-term damage resulting from these ideas pushed by left-leaning people that I consider to be highly intelligent.[/quote]
I also see long-term damage resulting from ideas pushed by right-leaning people that I consider to be highly intelligent. Go figure…
[quote]I would be willing to debate these ideas on their merit, and I attempt to do so but then we get to this blocking and defensive response of taking things personal and attacking my character. [/quote]
Like dismissing people’s idea’s by saying they have been brain washed, or our just “bleeding hearts”, who’s only goal is to control the actions of others?
[quote]If it is unwanted and uncomfortable, then see the list above and work to clean up your act and be open to all opinions.[/quote]
Back at you.
Fair enough B. Nice. I will try to clean up my name calling.
Note that I thought “bleeding heart” was a badge of honor for a liberal? Apparently not.
However, I think you are on very thin ice preaching a moral equivalency for this and the list I provided. Inferring that someone is a racist because they oppose our immigration policy and want strict laws applied to illegal immigrants, or because they support stop and frisk laws to help prevent gun crime… to being called a “bleeding heart”… really?
In terms of “brain-washed”, the only reference I can remember is related to the liberal ideological brainwashing of public school and college students.
I absolutely still stand by that claim.
Topic: fluoride!
DP said – [i]”if the people have nothing new to say, then yes, it becomes tedious and repetitive”[/i]
I couldn’t agree more. It happens here a lot.
[quote]nferring that someone is a racist because they oppose our immigration policy and want strict laws applied to illegal immigrants, or because they support stop and frisk laws to help prevent gun crime… to being called a “bleeding heart”… really? [/quote]
When you say things like “funny talking people” and that the police have a right to stop and frisk people because of how they look, or that people should be targeted for screening at airports because of they way they are dressed which is based on the cultural norms of their country or religion it’s not a big leap to say you sound racist. (For the record, I don’t think [u]you’re[/u] a racist, but I do think your comments sometimes come across [u]as racist[/u].)
When the people arguing for fluoride clearly state why, instead of taking them at face value, you attribute some other motive to their actions, like their need to control people, or their desire to make themselves feel better about themselves. This seems a much bigger, and less substantiated, leap to me.
“if the people have nothing new to say, then yes, it becomes tedious and repetitive” – “I couldn’t agree more. It happens here a lot.”
For those that this bothers, you may wish to work on a virtue known as patience. Perhaps be thankful that we have an active citizenry. I doubt people would give up what else they could do on a Tuesday evening to come and say “ditto”. Citizens want to have THEIR opinion heard, even if others share it. Not efficient? Yes. I am sure the council members and some of those that haunt council meetings would agree, but it is not going to happen. Thanks for sharing your impatience with us.
[quote]I couldn’t agree more. It happens here a lot.[/quote]
Yeah, but at least hear you can skim and people aren’t forced to stay up all hours of the night hearing the same things being repeated over and over.
” you may wish to work on a virtue known as patience. “
alan – i think you often make well-considered and thoughtful comments during public comment, but after a certain amount of time there gets to a point in a debate where enough is enough. we know this is a contentious issue, we know both sides are passionate about it, but at some point the council just has to make a decision. i don’t have a problem with people wanting to be heard, but sometimes it’s time.
“I don’t think you’re a racist, but I do think your comments sometimes come across as racist.) “
I think we are all racist in that we do or say things that are insensitive to people that come from different cultures or backgrounds. Whenever I have been called racist, something that happened to me occasionally when I taught kids in Fairfield and Woodland, I would always try to reflect upon the possibility the accusation might have some merit. I think the worst thing you can do is be too dismissive of the claim because the accuser may be identifying biases you are unaware exist in your personality, and by being too dismissive you will fail to learn from your mistakes.
Sorry to be off topic but it seems to possibly be a teachable moment.
[i]it’s not a big leap to say you sound racist.[/i]
It should be a HUGE leap. You don’t get to use that claim lightly. You and your ilk have done well to make it a serious claim. So you should tread very lightly with it.
There is nothing racist in demanding that law enforcement target people fitting the profile of groups more likely to be involved in criminal acts in order to do a better job keeping them and the rest of us safe from premature death. It does not matter if it is a big, bearded and tattooed white dude riding a Harley. There have been times when this profile WAS targeted as having a higher likelihood of being involved in crime. Now it is just a bunch of aging baby boomers trying to be hip.
[i]I think we are all racist in that we do or say things that are insensitive to people that come from different cultures or backgrounds.[/i]
Don’t confuse insensitivity with hypersensitivity. Those who are hypersensitive should have no more power to force others to bend to their unreasonableness than do those who are truly insensitive. We all live together and we all have to get along. There is a need for balance… no organization of diverse people can function well walking on so many eggshells of extreme sensitivity and political correctness. Life is tough. life is cruel. Put on big boy pants, grow thick skin, and get over it. Sticks and stones. No material harm. You will be fine.
But if “liberalism” was classified as a race, you might then call me a legitimate racist. Because I am intolerant of it and think the rest of us should (legally of course) discriminate against it.
Sorry Don, I could not resist the teaching moment.
By the way, what are the odds-makers saying about a vote on fluoride tonight?
[quote]By the way, what are the odds-makers saying about a vote on fluoride tonight?[/quote]
That it will die for lack of a second, I’d say from David’s commentary.
Wow, David is a sort of a liberal Rush Limbaugh equivalent of Davis media having that much political influence.
But I am not surprised in any case.
It seems to me that Alan Pryor is the one batting 1000 in council influence. I think some of us have our work cut out for us protecting our freedom to BBQ in our backyard. Maybe I should just invite him over for a dinner of my family and friend-famous smoked pork ribs! Though I am guessing he might not eat meat since livestock ranching costs a bit more in carbon emissions than does farming.
Can I suggest that the pro-fluoride people pause for the time they require to go collect REAL statistics on how many people in the community actually NEED hand-holding to get adequate dental care. David mentions his nephew. I might be wrong, but I think his nephew did not live in Davis when he was younger. So, in addition to just counting the people with evidence of tooth decay, you will also need to factor the number that would live in Davis for the key years that fluoride would help them fight tooth decay due to lousy parenting.
Once you have some real numbers come back and make your case.
My guess is that those numbers will be exceedingly low. I’m not minimizing the impact to those people. But it the number is low, there are many more cost-effective approaches to the problem we should be pursuing.
My guess here is that like for concerns about hunger, some people’s imaginations go wild with emotional turmoil. They inflate the problem in their mind to epidemic proportions. The truth is probably much, much less than their concerns. We need real data to act on spending this amount of money and causing this much turmoil in the community.
Go get your real data and come back.
[quote]When Arnold was governor he signed a law that got the soda out of our schools[/quote]
That is the kind of public policy I am talking about, Mr. Toad, but we need to do more. The current policy excludes juices and electrolyte drinks, both very high in sugar. Children can still purchase sugary drinks on the way to and from school, or bring them from home, or go and buy them at lunch from an open campus high school.
Obesity remains dangerously high in California, our statistics are nothing to crow about [url]http://www.childhealthdata.org/docs/nsch-docs/california-pdf.pdf[/url] Both obesity and dental decay are primarily nutritional problems requiring nutritional solutions.
“Can I suggest that the pro-fluoride people pause for the time they require to go collect REAL statistics on how many people in the community actually NEED hand-holding to get adequate dental care. “
how many would be enough – 10? 100? 1000?
“David mentions his nephew. I might be wrong, but I think his nephew did not live in Davis when he was younger. “
i think you fall into the same trap that growth falls into, you seem to believe there aren’t poor people in davis. we have section 8 housing, we have four title one schools and poor kids throughout the district, you don’t think there’s a need for dental treatment here, based on what?
“Citizens want to have THEIR opinion heard, even if others share it. Not efficient? Yes. I am sure the council members and some of those that haunt council meetings would agree, but it is not going to happen.”
I get that people want to be heard and I think it’s important that they are, but they have many forums, especially on this issue to do so. It’s not just about efficiency and patients. It’s about respecting other people’s time. Council sets an agenda and should do their best to follow it. When they run late it effects the entire agenda and everyone connected to the different items on that agenda. I would hope public commenters would take this into account, especially when many people are speaking on one issue, that has been well vetted, and when their point has already been made by others.
Well, if you only have 100 people, and you are projecting a 5-year cost of $3.5 million give or take, that is $35,000 per person. It sure seems that you could spend quite a bit less per person and do a much better job.
I know there are low income people in Davis. Just not as many as most other communities (as a percentage of the total population).
It reminds me of that joke.
Guy on his knees looking for something in the lush green grass of his front yard on a beautiful spring day. I ask “what are you looking for?” He says “the nickel I lost in my dark and damp basement.”
I think you imagine that our situation to be the dark and dank basement, but it is really not anything close to it.
if it were 100 people, then i think the city would want to partner with woodland and west sacramento or the county on a broader program. i doubt it’s that low a number just based on my work a few years back in this area.
“Children can still purchase sugary drinks on the way to and from school, or bring them from home, or go and buy them at lunch from an open campus high school.”
Stop by Nugget on Wednesday morning, a hang for Holmes students on this late start day, if you want proof of this. Kids can be found buying large quantities of soda and candy. (I did hear one kid tell another that the store wouldn’t let him buy a red bull.)
not to mention load up on donuts
“Frankly: By the way, what are the odds-makers saying about a vote on fluoride tonight?”
Did you read this piece or just skip right to the comments?
I read it. It was/is just David’s opinion. I was asking for a broader opinion.
Jamie Oliver (The Naked Chef) did a show a while back here he was coming to the US and going to areas where there is high obesity and teaching schools how to prepare healthy and fresh food.
It was interesting how hostile the adults working in the school food service were being told they didn’t know what they were doing. It was true too that most of those adults were noticeably obese.
The show did not last. People get angry when others tell them what to eat and what to prepare.
I have great friends that had developed terrible eating habits and it has taken me several years of feeding them fresh and healthy food that tastes great to get them off of the junk they would eat. A couple of them are so damn stubborn… I still love them… just sad that they will probably die young.
It takes work and effort to get people off of the sugary, salty and fatty junk.
My belief is that the stuff that is good for you – even when prepared well – might take a few times to get used to, but once it happens you never go back.
My kids did not eat fast food (except In-And-Out and Subway) when they were young. Now they both cannot stand most fast food… says it makes them feel sick.
You can train people to eat well.
I am all for restricting the fat, salt and sugar in the diets of children in school, supplementing the cost of feeding them, and teaching them how to prepare their own healthy food.
Once they are adults, they can eat whatever they want.
[quote]DP – “if the people have nothing new to say, then yes, it becomes tedious and repetitive” –
Me – “I couldn’t agree more. It happens here a lot.”
Alan Miller – For those that this bothers, you may wish to work on a virtue known as patience. [/quote]
My comments had nothing to do with the City Council.
As far as patience goes I have a lot because I’ve never used any.
Frankly: Not all opinions are created equal. It was my opinion based directly on what each of the members of the city council told me. Can that change? Of course, they can change their minds. But it’s like I’m wildly guessing here.
Frankly: I would use the term “educate” rather than “train.” I tend to agree, that too will take money and effort especially to reach critical populations.
[quote]But it’s like I’m wildly guessing here.[/quote]
I’m guessing you meant to put a [b]not[/b] in there.
“It was interesting how hostile the adults working in the school food service were being told they didn’t know what they were doing. It was true too that most of those adults were noticeably obese.”
I noticed that too. They were pretty hostile to him. (Did you see the one where he suggested that kids learn how to use a butter knife to cut their food, they almost went ballistic on him)
I have payed closer attention to the lunches offered by DJUSD, and they actually have pretty healthy options. I think they all have salad bars and supposedly the hot food is made from scratch. I think the Farms to a School program is responsible for at least some of this? I wish they would ditch the chocolate milk and as I’ve said before ban kids from bringing any drinks from home besides water.
Yes NOT wildly guessing – posting from my ipad.
B. Nice
[quote]I wish they would ditch the chocolate milk and as I’ve said before ban kids from bringing any drinks from home besides water. [/quote]
Maybe the schools could set up search lines manned with food Nazi’s and go through all the kids stuff as they enter school.
Staff Report completed by Herb Niederberger. Kim Wallace now presenting the pro-Fluoridation arguments.
Kim Wallace just finished. Alan Pryor now presenting the arguments of the Opponents of Fluoridation.
Rebuttals from both presenters completed. Staff now providing a Fact Check role.
I would be surprised if a motion to add F died for lack of a second. If there isn’t a third vote to add F to the water there would likely be a vote to put the issue to the voters. That is the safe position to take.
[quote]Maybe the schools could set up search lines manned with food Nazi’s and go through all the kids stuff as they enter school.[/quote]
3 years ago this month I went to rally in Washington D.C. where these and other wise words were written on many handmade signs (and all the word were usually spelled correctly):
[quote]”I disagree with you, but I’m pretty sure you’re not Hitler.” -Jon Stewart [/quote]
[quote] If there isn’t a third vote to add F to the water there would likely be a vote to put the issue to the voters. [/quote]
I think I’d need to relocate for a few months if this happened.
Public Comment — 2 minutes per speaker per the Mayor
Sheila Allen (speaking for Davis Board of Education) — Support
Don Saylor (speaking for Yolo County Board of Supervisors) — Support
Bill Owen (speaking for Yolo County Board of Education) — Support
Rhonda Adams (speaking for Dr. Ayala and the Yolo County Board of Education) — Support
Oscar Villegas (West Sacramento Council Member speaking for himself) — Support
Angie Wallace (speaking for American Dietetic Society) — Support
Shannon Snow (Davis resident) — Oppose (because other alternatives are available)
Derrick Allen (Davis resident) — Oppose (toxic fluoride bad for environment)
Andrew Wapton (sp?) (Davis resident) — Oppose
Jeff Boone (Davis resident) — Oppose (wouldn’t have voted for Measure I if he had known it would lead to fluoridation, would pledge $10,000 to a fluoride treatment)
Alan Miller (Davis resident) — Oppose (very creatively delivered explanation of the flaws of delivery system of fluoride)
Maria Shummer (sp?) (Davis resident) — Oppose
Joel Benson (UCD student) — Oppose (not enough solid justification to support)
Lorna Last name unheard (Davis resident) — Oppose (concerned about affect of fluoridation on thyroid because she suffers from thyroid disease)
Samantha McCarthy (Davis resident) — Oppose (topical treatment is the appropriate delivery method)
Name Witheld (Davis resident) — Oppose
Anthony Phillips (Davis pediatrician and former Chair of UCD Childrens Hospital) — Support (argued the human cost of not fluoridating water)
Name Unclear (Davis environmental scientist) — Oppose (caution about dosing)
Tia Will (Davis resident and Kaiser ObGyn) — Support (health care community is unanimously in support)
Yvonna Last Name Unheard (Davis pediatrician) — Support (see far too many caries in her pa
First Name Unheard Chang (low income dental provider in Yolo County) — Support
Hazel Morgan (Davis resident) — Oppose (ongoing scientific controversy)
Richard King (Davis resident — Support (very concerned about affect of caries on Seniors because of access to regular dental care. Fluoridation works for everyone)
Judy Capuro (retired high school counsellor) — Oppose
Jonathan Richard Nuttle (UCD graduate student in nutrition and toxicology) — Oppose (concerned about neuro toxicity of fluoride)
Francis Resta (Davis resident) — Oppose (concerns about bone brittleness and thyroid issues – voted for measure I because of water purity. Now that is being taken away)
Adrienne Kendal (Davis resident) — Oppose (use salt with fluoride rather than water with fluoride)
Michael Wilkes (Chair of Yolo County Health Council and UCD MD) — Support (where is the science that confirms the risk? It is totally absent. Fluoridation provides the greatest benefit for the greatest numbers)
Ken Helton (sp?) (Davis resident) — Oppose
So like an hour of public comment? That’s not too bad I was expecting more.
(public comment continued)
Name unheard (former Yolo County Health Officer) — Support
Barbara King (Davis resident) — Oppose (high risk for diabetics due to lack of dosing controls)
Jim Venable (Davis resident) — Oppose (bone fracture concerns)
Dexter Gelfand (Davis resident) — Oppose (health care professionals are suspect because they are subsidized by drug companies)
John Waggoner (Davis resident) — Oppose (conventional wisdom is that fluoridation is safe . . . conventional wisdom
Julie Gallelo (Executive Director of First 5 Yolo) — Support
Jane Last Name Unheard (Davis resident) — Oppose (choice not to be medicated)
Leslie Lindbo (Yolo County Environmental Health Officer) — Support (no evidence of health risk)
Arturo Villamor (Director of Yolo County Mental Health Department) — Support (psychiatrists see too many patients with poor dental health)
Jill Cook (Yolo County Public Health Director) — Support (proactive approach to a healthy community)
Doh!
Had to take a call so I missed the last 20 minutes of public comment which just ended
5 minute break
It is disheartening to me that there was not a single medical professional that came out in opposition to drugging a population without their consent. Or did I missing something?
Also, all public officials appear to support it. Makes one wonder if we are seeing a sheep march instead of any deep thought.
Dan Wolk moves to approve Staff’s resolution. His motion dies for lack of a second.
Lucas telling a personal story now.
Lucas arguing that the absence of any mention of fluoridation in Measure I “seems an awful lot like bait and switch”
So all the medical professionals and public officials support it, and you see that as a sheep march instead of deep thought. Do you put effort into this type of spinning or does it come naturally?
Toad:
[quote]I would be surprised if a motion to add F died for lack of a second. If there isn’t a third vote to add F to the water there would likely be a vote to put the issue to the voters. That is the safe position to take. [/quote]
Haha, now the safe way to go is have the citizens vote on F but when it comes to the Cannery you want the council to do their job and not let the citizens vote. So which is it?
“Lucas arguing that the absence of any mention of fluoridation in Measure I “seems an awful lot like bait and switch”
He may have a point here…
Lucas supports targeted proactive approach through dental care. Concerned that the proponents have not been open to any alternatives.
Lucas will vote against fluoridation
Thanks for the updates Matt
Rochelle commenting now.
“Council charged with balancing the issues and the voices of the constituents”
“Not comfortable making this decision without a vote of the citizens”
“Enjoyed Alan Miller’s very effective presentation in public comment that illuminated the dosing issue”
“there are alternatives out there to address fluoridation. Fluoride is not a component of clean reliable water.”
Rochelle will vote agains fluoridation
Frankly, my wife read your post about dental problems being mostly from immigrants and fully agreed. She is a kindergarten teacher and in all her 15 years of teaching in Davis she’s only had one student who had bad dental problems and that was the child of immigrants.
Brett commenting now.
Feels the comments were out of line about medical professionals having financial incentives for supporting fluoridation.
Shares colleagues concerns about fluoridating the water.
Called everyone’s attention to the recent series of events in Portland that were a drain on the community.
Alternatives for addressing the public health issues need to be committed to and acted on. We need improved dental care.
Brett will vote against fluoridation in the water.
[i]So all the medical professionals and public officials support it, and you see that as a sheep march instead of deep thought. Do you put effort into this type of spinning or does it come naturally?[/i]
I think it comes organically.
But seriously, never trust 100% agreement of a complex issue.
No charge for that important lesson.
Joe commenting now.
“The vote is clear based on the last three Council members’ comments.”
“Measure I would have lost if fluoridation had been part of the ‘package’ “
Joe will vote against water fluoridation
“Frankly, my wife read your post about dental problems being mostly from immigrants and fully agreed. She is a kindergarten teacher and in all her 15 years of teaching in Davis she’s only had one student who had bad dental problems and that was the child of immigrants.”
Oh, it’s only immigrant children that have dental issue and could benefit from water fluoridation. I’m glad it went down then, I mean why waste our money on them….
Growth Izzue said . . .
[i]”Haha, now the safe way to go is have the citizens vote on F but when it comes to the Cannery you want the council to do their job and not let the citizens vote. So which is it?”[/i]
The groundswell from the anti-fluoridation community is a roar. The groundswell from the anti-Cannery community so far is a whimper. Gather the signatures GI. Gather the signatures. Show your voice to be a roar.
[quote]She is a kindergarten teacher and in all her 15 years of teaching in Davis she’s only had one student who had bad dental problems and that was the child of immigrants.[/quote]
Your wife does dental inspections of all her students?
Very encouraged to hear Lucas and Rochelle speak about the problem of sugar consumption during their comments. I sincerely hope that the CC will consider supporting the restriction of sales of sugary drinks to children.
Ernesto said . . .
“Thanks for the updates Matt”
My pleasure.
GI: do you consider 5 years olds whose baby teeth are so rotted out that they had to be replaced by metal ones a “bad dental problem”, if so spend some time in lots of different kindergarten classes in Davis and you will find more then 1 child with this dental issue.
Motion made
Vote 4-1
Fluoridation R.I.P.
Shor:
[quote]Your wife does dental inspections of all her students? [/quote]
She does get up close and personal, she says you almost can’t help it when being around little ones for hours upon hours. She also wanted me to tell you that little ones let you know when they have pain, they don’t try to hide it.
If she is a Kindergarten teacher she might. She certainly would get the chance to see lots of teeth that fall out during the school day. Still it is sad that these two posters resort to attacking poor immigrant children, some of the most vulnerable members of the community.
Thanks Matt, glad you got done at a semi-decent hour!
[quote]Motion made
Vote 4-1
Fluoridation R.I.P. [/quote]
Yay, a win for the good guys.
I will admit that i am wrong on there being at least a second for F. Let’s see if they punt it to a public vote that is what i thought they should do all along.
” Still it is sad that these two posters resort to attacking poor immigrant children, some of the most vulnerable members of the community.”
DITTO- I’ll leave it at that.
Was there a second? How could there be a vote without a second? Looks like Dan has a lock on the medical professional vote.
[quote]Still it is sad that these two posters resort to attacking poor immigrant children, some of the most vulnerable members of the community. [/quote]
Not an attack at all. She just shared what her experience has been over her 15 years of teaching. She said at the time that she was very up front with the parents that their child needed care and things improved.
B. Nice said . . .
“Thanks Matt, glad you got done at a semi-decent hour!”
Actually there are still two important items to go. The update of Nishi and the Long Range Calendar where Council will wrestle with the Innovation Park Task Force / Ag farmland Conservation issues
It is clear that Science is not the strong suit of this Council.
[quote]” Still it is sad that these two posters resort to attacking poor immigrant children, some of the most vulnerable members of the community.”
DITTO- I’ll leave it at that. [/quote]
B. Nice, there you go again taking what is said out of context.
I don’t mind spending money on them. But let’s spend money wisely and get the care to those that need it.
[i]It is clear that Science is not the strong suit of this Council.[/i]
Please explain.
“B. Nice, there you go again taking what is said out of context.”
I quoted someone’s quote, blame Toad for taking it out of context.
Toad:
[quote]Let’s see if they punt it to a public vote that is what i thought they should do all along. [/quote]
LOL, that’s funny coming from you Toad.
“Actually there are still two important items to go. The update of Nishi and the Long Range Calendar where Council will wrestle with the Innovation Park Task Force / Ag farmland Conservation issues”
Ugh…
[i]”Still it is sad that these two posters resort to attacking poor immigrant children, some of the most vulnerable members of the community.” [/i]
Define attacking. Reads like you are doing the attacking B. Nice. Or B. Not Nice.
“I don’t mind spending money on them. But let’s spend money wisely and get the care to those that need it.”
I agree with you on this, and agree the fluoridation would not give us the most bang for our buck, I do think it was better then nothing, (plus we don’t have dental, so I’d take the extra fluoride, cavities are expensive.).
Matt — Thanks much for the play by play. I could not stay.
“Define attacking. Reads like you are doing the attacking B. Nice. Or B. Not Nice.”
Okay, I’ll make a better effort to live up to my name;-) My husbands out of town for three days, so I’m in single parent mode, which means I get stuck making sure teeth get brushed, flossed, and fluoride rinsed, it makes me grumpy.
Oh yeah, I remember that. I am on business trips and my wife calls me and starts the conversation “do you know what your son did?” Usually that meant I needed to buy her something nice or plan on taking the kids completely off her hands for a day when I got back.
Frankly, my pleasure. Thanks to you for your pledge.
Was that Frankly that p;edged the 10 grand?
I actually called my husband on FaceTime, set up the iPad in the bathroom and him supervise brushing, while I finished the dishes. (Well I told him that’s what I was doing, I was really blogging as B. Not Nice in the other room.).
Let’s get that dental care van rolling!
[i]I actually called my husband on FaceTime, set up the iPad in the bathroom and him supervise brushing, while I finished the dishes. (Well I told him that’s what I was doing, I was really blogging as B. Not Nice in the other room.).[/i]
LOL. Nice!
Let’s do it! Whose paying? Frankly?
Funny, I was watching the Pirate game and turned on the council meeting just as the 10 grand was being pledged and didn’t catch the guy’s name. Was that you Frankly? Comeon, now the liberals are going to have a harder time calling you a bigot, racist or claiming you attack immigrants.
“Come on, now the liberals are going to have a harder time calling you a bigot, racist or claiming you attack immigrants.”
I know it will be awesome! We can call him a bleeding heart instead!
[quote]I know it will be awesome! We can call him a bleeding heart instead! [/quote]
LOL…. I guess it’s true, conservatives tend to be more philanthropic than liberals.
…aaaaand they’ve adjourned, with Brett adding a request for a report on the process, and an update on the status, of Mace 391, expressing misgivings about the way the staff report and vote were presented to the council. Emphasized (three times) that he was not requesting reconsideration. Lucas agreed with the request, but also firmly said he was not requesting reconsideration. More a response to public comments, it seems, than a wish to revisit the decision.
Don, one step at a time. Starting with an emphatic questioning of both transparency and honesty is an intriguing place to start.
Now David just needs to sip a bit more of the Kool-aid and The Vanguard will come out in favour of scrapping the whole water project and drilling deeper wells.
Naaaah biddlin. Won’t happen. Council voted last night to ban Kool-Aid in addition to fluoride.
[quote]LOL…. I guess it’s true, conservatives tend to be more philanthropic than liberals.[/quote]
You going to put your money where your mouth is?