The Shaler Township water plant has been operating for over 50 years serving customers in Shaler, Etna and Hampton. In 2002, after years of debating the issue of fluoridation, the Chairman of the Water Committee, Mr. Bill Cross, requested an extensive study be conducted on the pros and cons of this chemical additive to the public water system. Public hearings and meetings were held to discuss the issue, and although turnout was not high, those that attended these meetings expressed widely differing and passionate views on the subject.

Our research and discussion on fluoridation lasted ten months and was locally publicized; only one resident came forward requesting the addition of fluoride to our water supply. Another sent an email to the Chairman of the Water Committee requesting fluoride, and after the research information was shared with that individual, they reconsidered their request. Three non-residents working in the dental field spoke in favor of adding fluoride.

The dental professionals quoted historical anecdotes comparing dental health between residents of communities that do and do not fluoridate the water supply. Unfortunately, a controlled, scientific study has not been conducted to determine the validity of these claims.

As an example, during one of the public meetings, a local dentist reported that one of our Township employees needed extensive dental repair work, which he claimed would not have been necessary if the person had been drinking fluoridated water. The result of further investigating this claim brought forth information which confirmed that while this person’s childhood home was in Shaler Township, the home itself was served by the West View water system, which does fluoridate the water supply.

Some of the issues that surfaced during our research are as follows:
• Babies under 6 months of age are not supposed to ingest any fluoride. Will they be placed at risk if they receive formula reconstituted with fluoridated water or if they are given fluoridated water to drink?
• Children need to drink 32 to 64 ounces of fluoridated water every day to obtain the benefit. It is not likely that most children drink this amount of water.
• There is lack of consensus regarding the age for which fluoridation is effective. Some say six years of age, others twelve or sixteen. Is it appropriate to medicate an entire population when the only potential beneficiaries are between the ages of six months and six years?
• It is almost impossible to determine how much fluoride a person ingests given the many other sources, such as juice and soft drinks made with fluoridated water and other food sources.
• Residents with thyroid problems implored the Township to not fluoridate the water supply.
• The Township received emails from all over the world asking, even pleading for us not to add fluoride. While some of the theories supplied by these contacts lack credible argumentation, others do raise good points.
• While some proponents claim fluoride is safe, there is no guarantee. Thalidomide is a perfect example of a drug that was considered to be safe by the medical community for use by pregnant women during the 1960s; until it was later determined that it caused severe birth defects and miscarriages.
• The issue for water plant management is not whether water fluoridation is effective, but whether it is our responsibility to medicate the public. Adding vitamins to the water source would probably produce a wider health benefit than fluoride, but there is no movement to do so, nor is it our responsibility.
• Pennsylvania forbids a water supplier from halting the addition of fluoride once they have chosen to do so. If information became available at a later time, confirming that water fluoridation presented a risk to consumers, the Township could not stop fluoridating water until the State permitted us to do so.
• Based upon conversations with other water plant operators, they would stop adding fluoride if they could.

Because there are so many potential sources of fluoride, determining how much fluoride an adult or child is receiving is a very difficult and individual thing. If a parent believes their child is not receiving enough, they can provide supplements or additional fluoride treatments through their dentist.

Shaler Township’s position is that although there may be evidence that fluoride is beneficial in the development of healthy teeth, it is not appropriate for us, as a government entity and a supplier of public water, to medicate consumers through our water supply. We believe it is the individual’s responsibility to provide this type of treatment if they so desire as it relates to proper dental care for their children and themselves.

Therefore, based on the above investigations and public input, the Shaler Township Board of Commissioners, at their Regular Meeting of February 11, 2003, rejected a proposal to add fluoride to the Shaler Township public water system.