Fluoridation without representation

By James Robert Deal | Dec 26, 2012
James Robert Deal, Lynnwood attorney

In 1991 Everett started adding fluorosilicic acid to its water without consulting with or obtaining the consent of the many other “captive” water districts throughout Snohomish County, those which have no choice but to buy water from Everett, including Mukilteo and Edmonds.

Fluorosilicic acid is a mixture of many compounds and elements. It is the unfiltered scrubber liquor from the wet scrubbers in the smokestacks of phosphate fertilizer plants in Florida, China and Mexico.

It contains or breaks down fluoride ion, hydrogen fluoride, orthosilicic acid, lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, chromium, copper, thallium, selenium, and barium. Thallium is radioactive and emits beta radiation.

Fluorosilicic acid breaks down into orthosilicic acid, which leaches large amounts of lead from pipes.

Centers for Disease Control admits that 41 percent of children have some level of dental fluorosis, which 12.2 percent of children have fluorosis serious enough to be noticeable, embarrassing and ugly.

Dental flurosis, which can appear as white spots, white streaks, cloudy splotches – and in severe cases – brown stains and pitting, is the permanent damage to the enamel caused by too much fluoride intake during the first eight years of life.

Fluorosilicic acid is an enzyme interrupter. Fetuses and infants are most vulnerable because their cells are still dividing. A recent Harvard study concludes that “children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low fluoride areas.”

Fluoridation causes or worsens arthritis, bone fractures, thyroid disease, kidney disease, heart disease and cancer. The effect is cumulative because the body has trouble excreting fluoride.

Fluoride also combines with aluminum – which is added to Everett water to precipitate dirt – and thus transports aluminum across the blood-brain barrier, where it may cause or worsen Alzheimer’s symptoms.

Fluoridation does little or nothing to reduce tooth decay. The CDC admits that the effects of fluoridation “primarily are topical for both adults and children” and not via consumption of fluoride.

Tooth decay has dropped just as much in non-fluoridated Europe as it has here. The big difference in Europe is that there is little dental fluorosis.

Safe water groups are asking Mukilteo and Edmonds the other “captive” water districts to demand that Everett deliver non-fluoridated water to those districts. Everett has four large pipelines coming down from Sultan, and one or two could be dedicated to carrying safe water.

For links to documents proving assertions made herein, see: http://fluoride-class-action.com/mukilteo-edmonds.

Fluoride Class Action is contesting the lead, arsenic, hydrogen fluoride, silicic acid and fluorosilicic acid added to drinking water.

It is our goal to put water districts, state and federal agencies, and suppliers of fluoridation materials on notice that they are exposed to serious liability for fluoridating drinking water.

It is our goal to force water districts to report these notices of potential liability to their insurance carriers. Insurance companies are not in the business of defending unreasonable and known risks. They will begin to limit and terminate coverage. This may break the logjam and put an end to the foolish practice of water fluoridation.

It is our goal is to create templates that local de-fluoridation groups can use with their own water districts. These will be templates for notices of liability, freedom of information FOIA requests, interrogatories, and lawsuit documents.

It is our goal to inspire class action and consumer protection attorneys to utilize the templates on our website to prepare notices, freedom of information requests, and actual lawsuit documents for use against local water districts.

If you want to prevent your water district from fluoridating or if your water district has already fluoridated, follow the steps outlined at www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com.

Flouride Class Action plans to appear before the Mukilteo and Edmonds city councils soon with hopes that the community will help us move the captive water districts to pressure Everett to quit adding industrial additives to our water. A little bit of poison is not OK.

James Robert Deal is an attorney based in Lynnwood and president of Fluoride Class Action. For more information, go to www.Fluoride-Class-Action.com.

Comments (11)
Posted by: kurt Ferre | Dec 26, 2012 16:25

Mr. Deal has a poor understanding of basic chemistry:

When HFSA is added in a controlled manner to water and the pH is greater than 4.1 (water is near neutral at pH of 7.0), there is complete, I repeat, complete dissociation into the ionic components:  fluoride, hydrogen, and a little silica.  The orthsilic acid mentioned is a bunch of poppycock.

Mr. Deal:  Fluoride ion is a fluoride ion is a fluoride ion.  There is NO difference, regardless of the source.

Environ Sci Technol. 2006 Apr 15;40(8):2572-7.

Reexamination of hexafluorosilicate hydrolysis by 19F NMR and pH measurement.

Finney WF, Wilson E, Callender A, Morris MD, Beck LW.

Mr. Deal is on a one-man crusade to end what the CDC calls "one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th Century"

Posted by: John T Baker | Dec 26, 2012 22:53

This article is written by a lawyer; what more can I say.  Dental fluorosis in children is not caused by the levels of fluoride imparted intentionally to drinking water.  Dental fluorosis does occur occasionally due to natural fluoride which occurs in groundwater in some areas of the country.

Aluminum, while associated with the brain tissue of some Alzheimer patients, has never been identified as a causation factor.  Aluminum is the 3rd most abundant element on the earth and the most abundant metal...it's in the dirt on your carrots and potatoes, for goodness sakes! Even the Alzheimer's Association states "...while there is circumstantial evidence linking this metal with Alzheimer's disease, no causal relationship has yet been proved.  As evidence for other causes continues to grow, a possible link with aluminum seems increasingly unlikely."

This kind of pseudo science is a shame and a sham and continually makes the rounds based on The Internet (where.of course, only truth exists) and the general lack of scientific education in our society.  Guys like Mr. Deal are able to strike just the right tone between a level most people can "think" they understand mixed with some "technical sounding" garbage that most people must take for granted, since they haven't the technical knowledge to really know.  There is no mystery here...this "fluoridation issue" is known science.

Let's hope our crack Mayor and Council dispense with this character quickly.

Posted by: Joe Bloggs | Dec 27, 2012 02:19

Kurt Ferre, it's true that fluoride ions are identical, if you neglect the existence of different isotopes, which is biologically irrelevant in this case. However, the behaviour of silicofluorides is not as simple as you imagine. Read the Main Report at the following address and educate yourself.


The CDC has long been one of the main promoters of water fluoridation, so it's self-accolade should be taken with a grain of salt. Grow up.

John Troy Baker, it has been officially reported that 41% of American 12 to 15-year-olds have dental fluorosis, and an official recommendation has been made that the upper limit for fluoride concentration in artificially fluoridated water be lowered from 1.2 ppm to 0.7 ppm. The idea that such a high rate of dental fluorosis is solely the result of natural fluoride in groundwater is laughable. The evidence for fluoride as a causative factor in Alzheimer's is not as strong as that for some other adverse health effects of fluoride, but it is known that binding with fluoride allows aluminium to readily cross the blood brain barrier.

It's actually the idea that fluoridation is safe and effective which is pseudoscience. Dentists are not toxicologists, and are incapable of carrying out the toxicological research which would be required to demonstrate safety. No double-blind trial has ever demonstrated either the safety or efficacy of fluoridation. When honest and competent senior dentists such as Dr Hardy Limeback and Dr John Colquhoun have examined the evidence, they have discovered that water fluoridation does not reduce the rate of dental caries, and have reversed their position on the practice. It's the dentists and bureaucrats who promote fluoridation who are pseudoscientific, not people such as Dr Arvid Carlsson, joint winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize in Medicine, and the several toxicologists and other real scientists who oppose fluoridation.

Posted by: Matthew Richardson | Dec 27, 2012 22:09

There's been convincing arguments on both sides. However, those who oppose water fluoridation have a significant edge: they have a right to *not* be fluoridated.

Ill go ahead and ignore all the scientific articles on either side for a moment. Taking a flu shot is medically sound, but we dont force people to do it. It's easy for those who want fluoride to just buy fluoride toothpaste and capsules. Governments shouldn't be in the business of forcing medications on people. As history shows us, that is a slippery slope.

Posted by: Joe Bloggs | Dec 28, 2012 00:34

Proponents of fluoridation usually don't make any arguments in its favour. They just say things which amount to "trust us", tell blatant lies such as saying that fluoridation has been proven to be "safe and effective", and use inane insults against their opponents. The arguments which they do occasionally use are extremely poor. For example, their so-called "proof" that fluoridation is effective depends on making very selective comparisons. They conveniently ignore more comprehensive studies which demonstrate that fluoridation is completely ineffective. They also ignore the fact that Japan and several European countries rejected fluoridation in the 1970s, and instead of an increase in the rate of dental caries, there has been a big improvement without water fluoridation. Everyone who actually bothers to examine the evidence comes to the same conclusion: fluoridation is very dangerous, and completely ineffective.

Posted by: James Robert Deal | Dec 30, 2012 08:07

From James Robert Deal:

See my response to John Troy Baker at:



Posted by: James Robert Deal | Dec 30, 2012 08:39

From James Robert Deal:

See my response to Kurt Ferre at:




Posted by: James Robert Deal | Dec 30, 2012 08:43

From James Robert Deal:

Read the Fluoridation Without Representation article online at:


The article contains links to supporting documentation.


Posted by: Richard Sauerheber | Dec 30, 2012 13:33

Mr. Deal understands basic chemistry better than Mr. Ferre does. Deal agrees with Ferre, that fluorosiicic acid diluted at pH 7 is fully dissociated. That was his point. It dissociates into fluoride ion and the weak acid silicic acid (with trace HF) as described by the NRC in 2006. The NMR article cited also confirms this. But the point is that silicic acid is the ingredient involved in the leeching of lead salts in old plumbing as found in Seattle and Everett.  The NMR article also confirmed that a complex, SiF5-, forms at pH below 3, which is a pH common in man and animal stomachs and this complex is assimilated, as is HF, the form of most of the fluoride at stomach pH. And by the way, of course fluoride is fluoride in any substance, but that is an incomplete statement because the toxicity of fluoride is determined by its environment. Calcium fluoride is not a toxic compound, but all industrial fluorides lack calcium and are listed as toxic calcium chelators.  If dentists used calcium fluoride for teeth treatments we would not be so concerned, and we would not have lost chidlren to heart attack who swallowed some fo the gel. Fluoride in the presence of calcium behaves totally differently than fluoride in the absence of calicum, as in fluoride dental gels and as added into Everett water supplies. And ingested fluoride from water produces only 0.02 ppm fluoride ion in saliva to topically bathe teeth (NRC), worthless for dental caries compared to toothpaste with fluoride at 75,000 times higher concentration. Systemic fluoride was ruled ineffective by the CDC in 2001, which is old news for most of us, but not for those who still promote its ingestion. The truth can hurt one's stubbornness, but not acting on the truth can hurt most everyone else.  Fluoride is not listed in any Clinical Chemistry or Nursing or Veterinary Manual as a normal constituent of blood for a very good reason--it isn't.   Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D. Chemistry

Posted by: Richard Sauerheber | Dec 30, 2012 13:58

Mr. Baker claims Deal uses 'pseudoscience' that is a 'sham' and he should be dispensed with? Without Deal many in WA would not know the truth, which is that every city that adds industrial fluoride into its water supplies has increased incidence of dental fluorosis--there are no exceptions. This was published by the fluoride promoter Dr. Pollick in an extensive review article. Who is Mr. Baker? Aluminum and fluoride are more toxic together than either separately (published in Brain Research by Varner and coworkers and confirmed in other labs) because aluminum fluoride complexes form in the acidic stomach (NRC, 2006). Aluminum does not belong in anyone's brain tissue, especially in Alzheimer's victims with abnormal tau protein that binds aluminum.  Without fluoride,  aluminum passes through the GI tract and is efficiently eliminated, thank God. What Baker refers to as sham pseudoscience is the inference that aluminum incorporation into brain is harmless, even in those with Alzheimer's!!  Deal does not claim that Al cause the disease, and the Alz Assoc. does not know itself what actually causes it--no one does. Of course Alzheimer's can occur without incorporated Al. But this does not make aluminum fluoride in brain tissue harmless. Sorry, but if one doesn't discuss the Varner and subsequent data, then there are no rights to claim one-ups-manship on the toxicology of aluminum fluoride. And being a lawyer does not pre-empt anyone from factual. The FDA from 1963 to present ruled fluoride is an uncontrolled use of an unapproved drug, banned it in water to be ingested by pregnant women in the U.S., and declared from NIH studies that it does not strengthen bone as hoped for by promoters of the ingestion of this toxic calcium chelator. The world waits for the FDA to extend that ban for the general population soon. 41% of U.S. teens with abnormal unsightly tooth fluorosis is only one aspect of adversity from ingestion of this industrial waste that the FDA ruled correctly is not a mineral nutrient. Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.

Posted by: Joe Bloggs | Dec 30, 2012 21:47

Calcium fluoride is less toxic than silicofluorides and other fluorides, but it is a toxic compound.

If you wish to comment, please login.