To the Editor:
I have been reading some of the comments about the fluoridated water issue in Edgartown, and have taken some time to look at the research for myself. There are convincing arguments and good people on both sides.
There are plenty of studies to cite as “proof” for either opinion. One person cited a “recent EPA study” that was commissioned on Nov. 23, 2016, and concluded on Feb. 27, 2017. It pains me to say that that study carries little credibility with me personally, given that the current director of the EPA has no desire to protect the environment or the people affected by its decisions.
The point here, however, is not about whether fluoridation is good or not. It is about the procedures of a local government — in this case, three people — to impose their opinion about what we and our children should ingest on a daily basis, presumably for the rest of our lives. There are obviously some concerns, and some gaps in regards to our knowledge about this. Why the rush? We spent eight years debating the roundabout, after all. Let’s put it up for debate, and hear from the people.
We may never know for certain if the risks outweigh the benefits, but — right or wrong — it is a decision for the people of Edgartown to make, not three officials in a back room.