Listen to comments made by James Robert Deal to the Everett City Council on November 16, 2011 regarding lead in Everett drinking water.
In 2007 lead was found in Everett tap water at up to 63 ppm.
10-29-11
Friends,
Even after water districts stop fluoridation, there will still be between 8% and 30% lead in pipes and fittings. It’s close to zero but only in newer homes in California.
If fluoridation stops, how much lead leaching will still occur?
If we added no fluoride, how much lead would chlorine or chloramines leach?
How do we stop lead leaching? Do we remove all the pipe containing lead, as the Seattle School district is gradually doing?
To remove all the lead bearing pipes in old houses, old apartment buildings, old commercial buildings – would cost billions of dollars.
Is there a way to leave the lead in place and seal it in?
If water is hard, and you run calcium carbonate through the lines, the carbonate bonds with the lead and walls it off. Will that wall prevent chlorine from leaching lead?
The first and most important step is to stop fluoridation, especially with silicofluoride. How badly does sodium fluoride leach lead?
Lead leaches out more in soft acidic water, like we have here in Seattle. Our water is very low in calcium and other minerals.
So what is the best alkalizer to raise the pH? How does the alkalizer interact with the chlorine or chloramines?
Is the amount of lead that chlorine will leach de minimis?
What would be the cost of killing the bacteria closer to the place of use, in the neighborhoods, with ozonation? Instead of running chlorine throughout the entire line, just ozonate in neighborhoods. What is the cost differential? How much cancer is caused by inhaling chlorine in shower water or in drinking chlorine?
I think our work is gaining more traction because we are focusing on the lead and arsenic as well as the fluoride, and we are explain that silicofluoride is even worse than sodium fluoride.
These city council members are programmed, and the best way to deprogram them is to explain the entire picture to them.
If we offer a comprehensive solution to water quality, one that minimizes exposure to lead as well as fluoride, I think they will more likely find their way out of the maze.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090906112824AAWGrcF
http://www.chemguide.co.uk/inorganic/group4/chlorides.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%28II%29_chloride
http://www.lenntech.com/periodic/water/lead/lead-and-water.htm
This is a good one:
Sincerely,
James Robert Deal , Attorney
James@JamesRobertDeal.com
PO Box 2276 Lynnwood WA 98036
Telephone: 425-771-1110
10-16-11
With the cessation of fluoridation with silicofluoride, lead levels should have dropped in water and in blood.
And kidney patients in the dialysis centers should be doing better; kidney function should be improving.
How would you go about getting someone in Calgary to look into these issues? Who might I ask?
If we fail to do this research, we will be missing a golden opportunity. This is a biological experiment made available by a mass change in an environmental condition. It would be much easier to study than looking for a few people who moved into or out of fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas.
See: http://fluoride-class-action.com/hhs/comments-re-lead
We quote[56] from Fluoride and Lead by Frances Frech:
Let us tell you a tale of two cities–Tacoma, Washington, and Thurmont, Maryland. Both of them saw significant decline in [blood] lead levels only six months after fluoridation was stopped. (In Tacoma, that was due to equipment problems, in Thurmont, it was a temporary ban by the city council.) Tacoma registered a drop of nearly 50% …; in Thurmont it was 78%. To the best of our knowledge, no other explanations were offered. In Thurmont the ban is now permanent.”
Unfortunately, Tacoma returned to fluoridating its drinking water and a battle continues over whether to reverse this policy.
***
From: James Beck, University of Calgary
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 2:50 PM
To: James Robert Deal
Subject: Re: Compare lead levels in water and lead levels in Calgary – before and after cessation of fluoridation
Mr. Deal:
I agree with you that the suggested investigation would be important if competently done. As I said I will see if I can find an appropriate, and approachable, investigator. You ask how you would find such a person and whom you might ask. If you want to try this directly yourself (I see no objection to that, but I have never heard of such a move in the past) then I suggest you focus on a nephrologist. Preferably an active experimental researcher. If there isn’t such a creature in Calgary, then look for a clinical nephrologist. One can ask, say, the head of the Department of Medicine for a name and contact information or ask the Dean of Medicine. Here’s a start: http://medicine.ucalgary.ca/ . I’ve just made a futile and time-consuming effort to get the specific possible contacts for you and I have a commitment to meet now.
I suppose you realize that getting such a project going would take considerable time. That’s not a reason not to try of course.
Jim Beck
***
Dr. Beck,
Many cities have terminated fluoridation. Calgary could be the template for investigating the changes that result in personal health.
If you could find someone there, it would be your good deed for the year
James
In 2004 it was discovered that old Seattle schools had up to 1600 ppb lead in first draw water from water fountains.
Field sampling and laboratory studies were conducted to investigate lead release from new end-use components used in drinking water fountains in Seattle (Washington) Public Schools. Analysis of sequential small-volume samples collected at 22 sources found high lead concentrations in water that was left standing overnight. Results showed significant lead release at or near bubbler heads and at another location upstream of the bubbler head in the end-use plumbing. Laboratory testing of new end-use components were used to estimate the relative contribution of each component to the total lead release in a first-draw sample. Results of the field sampling and laboratory testing programs helped develop mitigation strategies for reducing overall exposure of Seattle’s students and staff to lead in drinking water.
1) Lead readings after cleanup still exceed 20 ppb. This is not acceptable.2) Readings would be lower if the water was not fluoridated.3) The School District has only partially solved, at enormous expense, the problem in old schools.4) The School District and the city are ignoring the lead problem in old apartment buildings, old houses, old factories, old office buildings.
See this article from the AWWA Journal. The summary says:
Title: Lead Release from New End-use Plumbing Components in Seattle Public Schools Authors: Boyd, Glen R.; Pierson, Gregory L.; Kirmeyer, Gregory J.; Britton, Michael D.; English, Ronald J. Citation: Journal AWWA, Vol. 100 Iss. 3, March 2008, Page Range 105-114, 10 Pages.
http://apps.awwa.org/waterlibrary/scholarabstract.aspx?an=JAW_0066131
The AWWA Journal posts this article:
Lead Release from New End-use Plumbing Components in Seattle Public Schools Authors: Boyd, Glen R.; Pierson, Gregory L.; Kirmeyer, Gregory J.; Britton, Michael D.; English, Ronald J. Citation: Journal AWWA, Vol. 100 Iss. 3, March 2008, Page Range 105-114, 10 Pages.
http://apps.awwa.org/waterlibrary/scholarabstract.aspx?an=JAW_0066131
I quote from the article:
Seattle (Wash.) Public Schools (SPS), a school district of 47,000 students in 102 schools and administrative buildings, purchases water from Seattle Public Utilities. More than 60% of the school buildings are plumbed primarily with galvanized steel piping. Many buildings are more than 40 years old and moderately tuberculated. In late 2003, the district faced numerous inquiries associated with water quality in its school buildings, with much of the concern focused on exposure of school children to lead (Pb) from drinking water fountains.In 2004, a comprehensive water quality monitoring program was conducted in SPS. …USEPA recommends that fountains be taken out of service when sampling results indicate that the lead level exceeds 20 ug/L. [That is 20 parts per billion, an unacceptable level on an ongoing basis. There is no mention of turning off the fluoride.] …Results of the SPS sampling indicated that 600 firstdraw samples out of 3,167 (19.0%) exceeded the USEPA guideline of 20 rg/L Pb in schools. The mean lead concentration of the first-draw samples was 21 rg/L, with a maximum observed lead concentration of 1,600 rg/L. …The new policy included a criterion that the lead concentration at every drinking water source in all school buildings be [less than] 10 ug/L [ten parts per billion], i.e., one-half of the USEPA guideline of 20 ug/L Pb for schools. [Ten ppb is still too much lead for children to be drinking.] …Several possible sources of lead were identified in the school piping systems, including old galvanized-steel pipe, lead/tin solder, and brass components such as bubbler heads, valves, elbows, ferrules, and flexible connectors. …Mitigation included one or more of the following options: totally or partially replacing building piping; replacing bubbler heads with low-lead « 0.3 % Pb) brass bubblers; installing new end-use plastic-lined flexible connectors, valves, and fittings; disabling the fountain if other accessible fountains were nearby; installing granular-media point-of-use (POU) filters for lead removal from incoming water (Boyd et aI, 2005); and/or providing bottled water. After implementation of the water quality monitoring program, followup sampling results indicated that some of the remediated sources exhibited lead concentrations that exceeded the school board’s criterion of 10 rg/L Pb.
***
Why is it so hard to convince every one that ingesting fluorosilic acid is the real problem with fluoridated water?
(1) The CDC and EPA have lied about this problem for 65 years.
(2) The most vocal anti-fluoridationists have aided and abetted by intoning the mantra “Fluoride is fluoride, is fluoride.”
Gerry C from Toronto says:
Changing lead service lines to plastic service lines is a half-baked solution if the water is treated with fluosilicic acid. The 8% LEADED BRASS FAUCETS will still release lead into the water being delivered at the bubler.
Why is it so hard to convince every one that ingesting fluorosilic acid is the real problem with fluoridated water?
(1) The CDC and EPA have lied about this problem for 65 years.
(2) The most vocal anti-fluoridationists have aided and abetted by intoning the mantra “Fluoride is fluoride, is fluoride.”
Peter Van Caulart may have more in depth info but from what we learned here in Toronto, estimate is that fluoridation is responsible for 75% of the lead measured in the tap water. Source water from lake Ontario is neutral to 7.2 pH with around 100 to 120 [ppm] total dissolved solids, good calcium balance, has zero ppb lead. Finished water leaving the treatment plant after sand filter, flocculation with alum, treatment to lower sulfur and phosphates, carbon filter, then chloramine and ammonia, acids or hydroxides for buffering, then fluoridation and further buffering if needed, has non-detectable lead or below 1 ppb.
Our provincially enforced drinking water regulations permit up to 10 ppb lead at the tap AFTER 5 minutes of cold water flushing. God only knows what the lead content would be BEFORE flushing huh. Ten percent of tests exceed the 10 ppb regulation overall and in the urban older neighbourhoods where lead supply pipes dominate the lead is higher on average at the tap, and the percentage of tests that fail the regulatory limit is closer to 40%. [It is estimated that] 70,000 urban households affected. [There is] no data on lead in water in schools, and the province was petitioned to remove the onerous requirement for testing the water at schools built after 1968 when lead pipes were no longer allowed, but caretaking duties ordered by Toronto District School Board now include flushing all drinking fountains for a full ten minutes each morning mon-fri Sept-July at all schools regardless of when they were built. As we know, the brass fittings will leach plenty of lead regardless.
My guess regarding Seattle is that due to the lack of calcium in the source water the fluoridation with HFSA (and I think you should specify this to differentiate it from NaF effect which leaches less lead) is responsible for 90% or more of the lead measured at the tap. Chloramine and chlorine disinfection alone leach a tiny amount. Water would likely meet regs for lead almost every test if fluoridation was ended. In every city where fluoridation with HFSA was interrupted for any length of time the measured lead content at the tap has fallen drastically. Didn’t they end fluoridation permanently in one major city [she is referring to Tacoma] as a result of finding this out but the other city put the fluoridation back on because hey, lead poisoning of kids is justified by reduced tooth decay.The EPA has simply abdicated its responsibility for protecting citizens from lead in tap water. It’s like there is this unwritten exception clause that everyone in government obeys but never mentions. Lead over 10 (or is it 15) ppb is illegal “except when caused by fluoridation”. Gee maybe they should put lead back in gasoline because lead protects us against radiation.
Fluoridation with industrial fluorides lacking calcium obviously always decreases the ratio of calcium+magnesium to fluoride in the treated water. In the Hereford Texas prototype natural water the ratio was 324 to 2 or 162 to 1. These people had increased tooth fluorosis from the natural fluoride and fewer surface cavities [due to] the naturally high calcium level.
In Seattle the naturally prevalent ratio is about 15 ppm calcium to about 0.02 ppm fluoride [if we did not fluoridate] for a minimum safe ratio of 375-750 or higher. By adding fluoride at 1 ppm, the ratio was lowered drastically to 15 to 1. Even using calcium fluoride does not help this ratio much, where it would still be about 16 to 1, but again using calcium fluoride would eliminate the need to add [a half ton of caustic soda for every ton of silicofluoride], and the material [using NaF instead of silicofluoride] would not have the significant amounts of arsenic, lead, uranium, etc. that plague the fluosilicic acid hazardous waste. Also it would not form silicic acid or as much hydrofluoric acid in the water which is also responsible for dissolving lead.
The reaction that dissolves lead solid is: Pb + HF goes to Pb2+ + F- + H2 ga
In Wikipedia under Lead and Copper Rule:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_and_copper_rule
are some really interesting points. For example:
“Partially because of lead pipes, some states regulated the corrosivity of water put into the distribution system.”
Does anyone know if the state of WA regulates the corrosivity of water?
Under the sub title Unusual features of the rule is the following statement:
“Especially for the larger systems, having the water supplier change the tendency of the water to dissolve lead in the customer plumbing may be more cost effective than having thousands of customers replace plumbing.”
Then on the EPA website at:
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/wswrd/cr/corr_res_lead.html
under:
Regulations to reduce human exposure to lead are:
The Lead and Copper Rule of 1991 – This rule requires lead and copper levels to be minimized in drinking water, primarily by reducing water corrosivity. It establishes an action level of 0.015 milligrams per liter (mg/L) for lead and 1.3 mg/L for copper in 90 percent of the first-draw water samples taken at specifically identified sites and after six hours of stagnation. (Refer to the Lead and Copper Rule targeting and sampling requirements.) The action level is the lowest level to which water utilities can reasonably be required to control lead if it occurs in drinking water at their customers’ home taps. (Note: An action level exceedance is not a violation but can trigger other requirements such as monitoring and treatment.)
To me that means eliminating fluoride from the water in order to reduce the corrosion of lead into the water from home and school pipes.
***
Leite GA, Sawan RM, Teófilo JM, Porto IM, Sousa FB, Gerlach RF.
Department of Morphology, Stomatology and Physiology, School of Dentistry of Ribeirao Preto, University of Sao Paulo (FORP/USP), Avenida do Café, S/N, 14040-904 Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brazil.
Our aim was to test the hypothesis that co-exposure to lead and fluoride alter the severity of enamel fluorosis.
Wistar rats were allocated in four groups: control, and 3 groups that received water containing 100 ppm of fluoride (F), 30 ppm of lead (Pb), or 100 ppm of F and 30 ppm of Pb (F+Pb) from the beginning of gestation. Enamel analysis and F and Pb determinations in enamel, dentine, and bone were performed in 81-day-old animals. Fluorosis was quantified using a new fluorosis index based on the identification of incisor enamel defects (white bands and white islets, representing hypomineralization, and cavities) weighted according to their severity and quantity. Hypomineralization was validated histopathologically by polarizing microscopy and microradiography. Scores were given by two blinded calibrated examiners (intra and interexaminer kappa values were 0.8 and 0.86, respectively).
The control and the Pb groups presented normal enamel. The F+Pb group presented more severe enamel defects compared with the F group (P<0.0001).
This study shows that lead exacerbates dental fluorosis in rodents, suggesting that co-exposure to lead may affect the degree of fluorosis.
***
Sawan RM, Leite GA, Saraiva MC, Barbosa F Jr, Tanus-Santos JE, Gerlach RF.
Toxicology. 2010 Apr 30;271(1-2):21-6. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Sawan%20Toxicology%20271%281-2%29%3A%2021-26
School of Dentistry of Ribeirao Preto, University of Sao Paulo (FORP/USP), Av do Café s/n, 14040-904, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Higher blood lead (BPb) levels have been reported in children living in communities that receive fluoride-treated water. Here, we examined whether fluoride co-administered with lead increases BPb and lead concentrations in calcified tissues in Wistar rats exposed to this metal from the beginning of gestation. We exposed female rats and their offspring to control water (Control Group), 100mg/L of fluoride (F Group), 30mg/L of lead (Pb Group), or 100mg/L of fluoride and 30mg/L of lead (F+Pb Group) from 1 week prior to mating until offspring was 81 days old. Blood and calcified tissues (enamel, dentine, and bone) were harvested at day 81 for lead and fluoride analyses. Higher BPb concentrations were found in the F+Pb Group compared with the Pb Group (76.7+/-11.0microg/dL vs. 22.6+/-8.5microg/dL, respectively; p<0.001). Two- to threefold higher lead concentrations were found in the calcified tissues in the F+Pb Group compared with the Pb Group (all p<0.001). Fluoride concentrations were similar in the F and in the F+Pb Groups. These findings show that fluoride consistently increases BPb and calcified tissues Pb concentrations in animals exposed to low levels of lead and suggest that a biological effect not yet recognized may underlie the epidemiological association between increased BPb lead levels in children living in water-fluoridated communities.
HHS has decided to issue its lame reply to the 2006 National Research Council report.
It recommends reducing fluoride added to drinking water to .7 ppm.
Fluoride Class Action submitted this reply.
On February 16 four of the board members for Washington Safe Water met with EPA administrators for the Northwest 10th District. They gave us a two hour hearing.
Audrey Adams prepared this PowerPoint. Her explanation of the effect of fluoride on the fluoride sensitized got through to them.
Dr. Bill Osmunson also presented his PowerPoint.
I presented my report on lead in Seattle drinking water.
3-2-10
Dear Fluoride Debunkers,
This is in Today’s NY Times. It’s about Blytheville Arkansas’s water. That’s just down the road from Promised Land, where where I fell to earth.
Go here to the Environmental Working Group and sign up for their e-mails. They apparently broke this story.
Pretty amazing stuff. The truth is starting to boil over.
I talked with Matt Mosley, one of the administrators at the Blytheville Water Works. Matt says that they go through two 55-gallon drums of fluorosilicic acide each month and that after Hurricane Katrina the fluoride started coming from China. Blytheville has been fluoridated since the late 1960s, so I drank that water until I left there in 1965. Water there comes out of an aquifer that is 1,800 feet deep and which stretches from the Bootheel of Missouri down to Memphis. Whether the massive quantities of pesticides and other chemicals sprayed on crops can penetrate that deep is something I have no information on.
Let’s all make a special push to bring this issue into people’s consciousness.
If you really want to do something to fight fluoride, mail a Freedom of Information request like this one and send to your city or water works:
http://dealmortgage.net/fluoride-class-action/arkansas-fluoride-freedom-of-information-request.htm
Organize! Send these notices out. Send copies to the mayors and city council people. Send copies to the newspaper. Find an attorney who has a conscience and ask him to sign them. Hold press conferences. Find a respected person to serve as spokesman.
Follow up as soon as they respond and send out a Notice of Potential Liability like this one:
http://dealmortgage.net/fluoride-class-action/notice-to-arkansas-of-liability-12-16-8.htm
Hold another press conference.
When your water district fails to send you an assay of raw scrubber liquor fresh from some Fluorida or Chinese phosphate fertilizer factory, send him a letter like this:
If we all push simultaneously, we can accomplish something. Don’t leave it up to others. Organize your group. I would love to fly in and do an organizational seminar and rally. I would help you write up all these documents so you can get started. If you can recruit a local lawyer, I will work with him.
Conive. Plot. Conspire. “Kick at the night until it bleeds daylight.”
DO SOMETHING!
Sincerely,
James Robert Deal , Attorney, Loan Officer
James@JamesRobertDeal.com
PO Box 2276 Lynnwood WA 98036
Telephone: 425-771-1110
Fax: 425-776-8081
www.Mortgage-Modification-Attorney.com
How Mortgage Modification Works
Save Fuel – Reduce Traffic Congestion – Improve the Environment
A Comprehensive Approach To Transit, Transportation and Land Use
Seattle Buses are Overflowing: But there is a Solution
Put the Viaduct and I-5 Together In A Tunnel Under Downtown Seattle
Oppose Water Fluoridation – Write the Governor
Deal Threatens to Sue his Home State of Arkansas over Fluoridation
Seattle Water Not Safe or Healthy – Seattle P-I Article by JRD
Tobacco Science, DDT Science, Tetraethyl Lead Science, Asbestos Science, Fluoride Science, All Fraudulent Sciences
Medical Doctor in Tennessee Legislature Calls for Halt in Water Fluoridation
Toxicologists Warns Against Water Fluoridation
Fluoride is Very Bad for Babies – Do Not Use Tap Water to Mix With Formula
The Connection Between Diet and the Environment – My Book
Earthlings -The Movie
30% Off On Quality Health Care
In 1986 the EPA greatly reduced the amount of lead allowable in water pipes, plumbing solder, and brass fittings.
However, lead is still allowed in all of these provided notice is given.
