It's Something in the Water

There are other indications that fluoride opponents are gaining recognition. At EPA headquarters, for instance, a unit of the Union of Scientists has been very outspoken in disputing the value of fluoridation. Other critics are raising issues that will be difficult to ignore. Some even are contemplating fairly aggressive approaches: One of several Internet sites hosted by opponents suggests that public officials should be sued for practicing medicine without a license.

RELATED ARTICLE: Is It Safe to Drink the Water?

It might seem there could be no subject much simpler to research than water. Certainly our relationship with it is simple: We turn a faucet and there it is. But there what is? We tend to think of the formula offered in school -- two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, or [H.sub.2]O. But, beyond this, water is a "universal solvent" that dissolves all sorts of materials and carries them along wherever it goes, unless those materials are intercepted and treated. Water is a complex and confusing subject featuring critical life-and-death issues that are matters of considerable controversy among experts.

In addition to the good and bad "stuff" -- chemicals, minerals, nutrients -- occurring more or less naturally in water as it is found in streams, rivers, lakes and other conduits or containers of God's creation, it also collects a lot of mostly noxious or harmful substances when forced through the incredibly vast supply and waste-disposal networks established by mankind. This infrastructure is, in many instances, in dangerous disrepair, having served underground for a century or two in some of our cities, out of sight and out of mind. These damaged conduits collect acid rain, storm water, industrial or agricultural wastes, leaking chemicals from underground storage or disposal sites, bacteria, viruses and parasites.

A series of recommendations to Congress and the administration on how to ensure the continuing quality of America's water supply and wastewater-treatment efforts will be issued very soon by the Water Infrastructure Network (WIN). This is a broad-based coalition of some 30 public and private groups concerned with drinking water, wastewater, engineering and environmental protection. They have put a $23 billion price tag on their proposals. While details remain under wraps, Insight has learned that the coalition has been working closely with House and Senate committees and the new administration's transition team, and indications are that the issues involved will be among the top legislative and regulatory priorities in the coming year.

The recommendations call for "a significant federal investment in technology- and management-innovation programs" to deal with repair and upgrading and the prevention of health hazards, according to Ken Kirk, executive director of the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies and a leader of the WIN coalition. "It also calls for a significant federal investment in training for communities that need training in dealing with water and wastewater issues," Kirk tells Insight. "I think we have the makings of something that is going to generate a lot of attention in Washington over the next several months."