A.G. Gancarski
A wide-ranging Florida Farm Bill backed by Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson found favor in the House Criminal Justice Subcommittee amid a debate over fluoride in Florida’s water supply.
Most discussion of the measure (HB 651) revolved around a proposed statewide ban on water fluoridation, with Democrats opposed and Republicans rallying to the potential preemption.
In her introduction, House sponsor Kaylee Tuck noted that “additives” would be removed from water systems under this proposal, driving pushback from Democrats.
Rep. Kelly Skidmore questioned the “health additive piece” of the legislation, wondering if data supported concerns about water fluoridation.
Tuck said it was about people wanting the ability to consent to health care options, and that people “aren’t consenting to using fluoride at this moment.”
“The consumer needs to be able to choose what they use and when,” Tuck added.
Republicans overwhelmingly supported a fluoridation preemption ahead of the 14-4 vote to advance the legislation.
Rep. Robbie Brackett said cities “shouldn’t be mandating or giving our citizens drugs without their permission.”
“And as a former Mayor, I can tell you that I don’t believe that we should be leaving it up to local communities to make that decision to drug their citizens,” he added.
Rep. Jessica Baker noted that many countries around the world have banned fluoride, and cited toothpaste warning labels to emphasize her point.
“If you swallow it, it’s poison.”
Committee Chair Danny Alvarez offered a stirring argument that “freedom is about freedom” before the debate, justifying the fluoride preemption on the state level as being “about liberty, about freedom.”
“Imagine if we said, hey, instead of putting in your water we’re going to force to inject you, right? We’re going to force you to take a pill, because we believe we know better than you on how to handle your children. We believe we know better than you because we happen to be the lucky ones that got elected that we should tell you what to put in your body,” Alvarez said.
“What if, instead of fluoride, we were putting Ozempic because we have a diabetes problem? We’re trying to make it get paid for by Medicaid right now. What if we just inserted that in the water?”
Members of the public, including dentists, disagreed with Republicans on the committee.
Mary Wynn of the League of Women Voters said her organization acknowledged “possible risks” of fluoridation, but said “dental and pediatric professionals continue to support fluoridation.” She reminded the committee of the concept of home rule, suggesting that water additives should remain a local issue.
Brandon Edmondston of the Florida Dental Association likewise expressed concerns about the proposed fluoridation preemption, saying not all communities are the same and that referendums could show local will.
He also made the case for fluoride in water as being “good for our public health.”
Richard Mufson, a dentist, spoke to the same issues, arguing that fluoride prevents tooth decay and that a “systemic small level in the water supply” benefits public health.
He blasted “fringe studies” showing fluoride “may cause physical harm, dementia, IQ issues.”
“Please take a look at those studies. Frequently, they are performed in other countries — Iran, China — with levels of fluoride way higher than we use in this country. So please ask the source for the validity of those studies,” he said.
While members of the public may back fluoridation, Gov. Ron DeSantis and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo do not.
“When you’re forcing it into the water supply, that’s not really giving people the choice. If people want to be able to purchase fluoridated water or do more, then they already have the ability to do it,” DeSantis said. “People can get fluoride by brushing their teeth.”
Ladapo has said putting fluoride in water was “health malpractice” and “insane,” given the compound’s “caustic” nature and the fact that toothpaste and other consumer products contain it and give people the option to self-administer.
Meanwhile, the Agriculture Commissioner’s package is also moving in the Senate, with a committee hearing slated for Wednesday afternoon.
2 comments
Ron Ogden
March 26, 2025 at 10:37 am
Get with it! It’s not the fluoride, it’s the force. If you want it, go get it. If you can’t afford it, get some charity to pay for it. If you don’t think people are smart enough to work the system, then help them. It’s your good deed for the day.
SuzyQ
March 26, 2025 at 11:06 am
Governments forcing fluoride into the general supply of public water is yet another example of medical authoritarianism. Individuals can readily choose for themselves whether they want to be sufficiently fluoridated or overly fluoridated from a variety of easily accessible products available at any local grocery, drug, or convenience store, such as toothpaste, mouthwash, etc., etc., etc. Individuals also have the right not to be force-medicated by their own government, hence, medical authoritarianism.
Comments are closed.