Proposal 1-FDA Approval

Dr. Bill Osmunson has put together a formal proposal to the Washington State Board of Health asking for new rule making on drinking water fluoridation.

The first hearing was held on Wednesday, June 9, 2010. See item 16.

In a nutshell, the proposal is that the Board of Health issue regulations which would declare:

That fluoride is a drug as defined by federal and state law. Therefore, the FDA has jurisdiction over fluoride as added to drinking water.

That fluoride may be added to Washington drinking water only if the chemical formula and the dosage are approved by the FDA.

The proposal asks that the Washington Board of Health acknowledge the new science regarding fluoridation, including the 2006 National Research Council report.

Read the following:

Petition to the Washington Board of Health for New Rule Making on Water Fluoridation

Appendix A: Proposed New Regulations, WAC 246-290-220 and 246-290-460

Appendix-B: The FDA Has Jurisdiction Over Water Fluoridation And Fluoridation Materials

Appendix C: FDA 1993 letter stating that the FDA is not approving fluoride tablets, fluoridated salt, or any other medicines or supplements for ingestion

Appendix D: Additional Laws, Court Cases, and Ethical Considerations

Appendix E: Major Health Issues Relating to Fluoridation

Appendix F: NSF – National Sanitation Foundation

Appendix G: How Much Fluoride Do We Need?

Appendix H: How much fluoride are we getting? How much can we take?

Appendix I: Fluoridation Risks

Appendix J: The Lack of Benefit From Fluoridation

Appendix K: Case Histories of Those Highly Sensitive to Fluoridation

Appendix L: Fluoride is regulated by the FDA

Appendix M: Testimony of Kathleen M. Thiessen To Washington Board of Health

Most of the documents linked above are Word documents. If you would like to edit or update them for your own use, click here to access them.


On June 9, 2010, the Washington Board of Health heard from Ned Therien, one of its staff members. Without hearing from proponents of the rulemaking request which would prevent fluoridation until approved by the FDA, the Board voted to dismiss the WASW proposal.

The justification given was mostly incorrect. The only valid point raised was that RCW 57.08.012 gives water districts the right to vote to fluoridate. To adopt the rule we were proposing would mean the complete cessation of all fluoridation. Fluoridation would no longer be an option, and the right of water districts to vote on it would therefore be meaningless. Further, the Board of Health as an administrative agency shys away from overruling or nullify a statute passed by the legislature.

The Board voted unanimously to reject our proposed rule. Most of the Board members had been given the Petition but not the Addenda. Only after voting our proposed rule down did the Board open the meeting to public comment!

Bill Osmunson and I each spoke. We said a lot in the three minutes alloted to each of us. I promised to write them a letter explaining what was wrong with their analysis.

Audrey Adams and Olemar Peterson spoke. They made the point that they or their children are hyper-allergic to fluoride and that the Board should take the issue more seriously.

Eloise Kailin and Gerald Steel,  on behalf of Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water (SAFE), faxed me a letter at the last minute and I submitted it to the Board. The Board accepted it as a new proposal for rule making. The Board made it fairly clear that although they turned down our rule making proposal, they were open to other proposals.

So Bill and I are not disappointed. If we keep educating, we will eventually get through on some level.

We received the e-mail addresses of the Board members, so I for one will try to educate them.

I will post my letter to the Board shortly.

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.
You must be logged in to post a comment.