<b>Negatives of fluoride</b>

EDITOR: Unlike Penny Vanderwolk ("Positives of fluoridation far outweigh negatives," Close to Home, Friday), I am against wholesale fluoridation of the public water supply. I'm not a member of the Sonoma County Oral Health Task Force. However, I am a retired registered nurse who can read.

I disagree that "all credible and current medical science supports fluoridation as the single most effective strategy for preventing dental caries," that opponents tout "psuedo-scientific" evidence against fluoridation or that they are dishonest about their true fears. There is plenty of actual scientific evidence questioning the wisdom of adding a by-product of the manufacture of phosphate fertilizers to public water supplies.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, 90 percent of fluoride added to public water comes from just that. Too much fluoride exposure causes dental fluorosis. Again, according to the CDC, as of 2010, 41 percent of children age 12-15 had some form of dental fluorosis. And a 2009 study of 600 children in Iowa found no significant link between fluoride exposure and tooth decay.

You are permitted to your opinion as I am to mine. But you are out of line when you accuse those with a differing opinion of being fearful or embracing junk science.



<b>Clean power?</b>

EDITOR: Sonoma County swoons at any project that is described as "green" or "sustainable." Sonoma Clean Power would create no power. The only jobs it would create are for an over-priced management team. And clean? Carbon credits are not clean. Biomass is not clean.

Proponents argue that money will be saved because there are no shareholders to demand a share of the profits. But they will buy all the power from out-of-state (Texas?), for profit, brokers. PG&E will distribute the power. That is two sets of shareholders who will reap rewards. And what California regulations will be required of the out-of-state energy producers? What happened to buy local?

Sonoma Clean Power is to be modeled on the Sonoma County Water Agency. Aren't those the people who rewarded their customers' water conservation efforts by raising the price of water? And who gave the Board of Supervisors the authority to create a power agency? I believe it is a vast over-reach of power.

I also believe that at some point it will fall to all the taxpayers in the county to bail out this ill-conceived project. That is always the case when something is shoved down our throats.



<b>Teachers' contributions</b>

EDITOR: We often hear we need better qualified teachers, our students are failing, there are too many poor teachers in the system, and so on. We have much more to look toward in our educational system to make necessary improvements.

As a K-8 teacher I spent a minimum of $1,500 per year out of pocket to have the proper tools to teach, which included math, language and science materials. I had to deliver No Child Left Behind without the proper support system. There was a lack of instructional aide time, lack of a full-time nurse, lack of psychology services and principals who were divided between two schools. I was expected to train my instructional aides and volunteers on my own. I had to clean my own room because custodial services were cut, and this included cleaning toilets.

Articles such as Eli Broad's ("A better way to train teachers," July 8) portray teachers as being the main problem in our schools. We need to look at all aspects of our educational system and quit making the hard-working, under-staffed teachers the scapegoats.


Santa Rosa

<b>Global warming</b>

EDITOR: Tim McGraw ("Warming scam," Letters, Friday) says the sun is the only source of warming in our solar system, and he's correct. However, the issue with global warming isn't the source of our solar heat, it's the increase in the number of people and their demands for energy that are warming the planet.

Perhaps one way to slow global warming would be for the pope to endorse contraception.


Santa Rosa