On March 23, 2022

Fluoride isn’t needed

Dear Editor,

Please excuse the proud parent quoting a letter of our son Gregory Crowther to state Senators in the Seattle area. He writes about a bill designed to expand and make permanent fluoridation in Washington State.

His remarks are worth sharing in fluoridated Rutland, because they focus on fluoride and body function, often overlooked in discussions about teeth.

Crowther graduated from Rutland High School in 1991. His solid preparation in Rutland schools helped him eventually to earn a doctorate in physiology and biophysics at the University of Washington in 2002. He is now a tenured professor at Everett Community College, just north of Seattle, teaching anatomy and physiology.

Here’s the gist of what Crowther wrote to state senators:

“I have read the bill [H 1684] and am alarmed by its overly pro-fluoride stance. Like you, I have not read enough of the original studies to gain a full picture of potential risks. Speaking as a biologist, though, here is the bottom line. Fluoride is not a nutrient needed by the body at any level; there are zero molecules synthesized by the human body that require a fluorine atom. Thus, the anti-fluoridation activists are completely correct to classify fluoride as a medical drug.

I applaud HB 1684’s focus on marginalized communities, but I scoff at the idea that these communities are well-served by a bill that makes it easier to put a drug (maybe innocuous, maybe not) into their water supplies without their informed consent — informed consent being a bedrock principle of ethical biomedical research and practice.

Informed consent does not simply ask each subject/patient to read information and ask questions… instead, it requires that they truly understand a proposed intervention before the intervention is enacted. This is simply not feasible with mass administration of a drug via a public water supply.

Thus, despite my generally high trust in government scientists and medical officers …I ask you, in this particular case, to reject this patriarchal, just-trust-the-government approach to supporting underserved residents.”

Signed by Gregory Crowther, PhD.

Obviously Crowthier’s objections to fluoridation apply equally to Rutland, whose water has been fluoridated since 1984.

Jack Crowther, Rutland

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

The public reality of private schools

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, In their June 13 commentary, “The Achilles’ heel of Vermont education reform,” the Friends of Vermont Public Education state that, “Since the early 1990s, we have been operating two parallel educational systems — public and private.” The organization calls upon the Vermont Legislature to create “one unified educational system,” arguing that, “The current…

Alternative steps for true education reform

June 25, 2025
By Jim Lengel Editor’s note: Jim Lengel, of Duxbury and Lake Elmore, started teaching in Vermont in 1972, worked for the state board of education for 15 years, and retired back in Vermont after helping schools all over the world improve the quality of teaching and learning. Our executive and legislative branches have failed during…

Protect SNAP—because no Vermonter should go hungry

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, As a longtime anti-hunger advocate, a former SNAP recipient, and a proud Vermonter, I am deeply alarmed by proposals moving through Congress that would gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known here in Vermont as 3SquaresVT. If passed, these cuts would devastate thousands of families across the Green Mountain State that rely…

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly of H.454

June 25, 2025
By Sen. Ruth Hardy Editor’s note: Ruth Hardy, of East Middlebury, represents Addison County in the Vermont Senate. She wrote the following reflection (originally posted at ruthforvermont.com) on voting “no” on H.454, the eduction transformation reform bill that passed last week.  On Monday, June 16, the Legislature passed H.454, the education transformation bill that was…