Editor’s note: For Election 2024, OPB has been diligently following local races, providing comprehensive coverage of campaigns and measures. Check results on the presidential race, key congressional battles and other outcomes at OPB’s elections page.
FILE - Ballots are processed at the Washington County Elections Office in Hillsboro, Ore., May 21, 2024.
Kristyna Wentz-Graff / OPB
Two ballot measures in Oregon that would put fluoride in city drinking water appear to be losing, according to results updated Wednesday from the Oregon Secretary of State.
The failures of the ballot measures — in Hillsboro and Lebanon — are yet another sign of Oregonians’ longstanding opposition to fluoride at the ballot box. Similar efforts have been rejected four separate times in the city of Portland, which is the nation’s largest city without fluoridated drinking water.
In Lebanon, which has fluoridated its water since 2001, about 52% of voters rejected a ballot measure that would have continued the practice. In Hillsboro, about 58% of voters said no to a measure that would have fluoridated the water, the first such measure for the city since 1952.
“We were ecstatic,” Rick North, former CEO of the Oregon chapter of the American Cancer Society, said of the results. “The people of Hillsboro recognized that fluoridation was not safe, and it was not effective, and we effectively got those messages across.”
Related: Hillsboro residents to vote on fluoride ballot measure
Fluoride advocates have long said it is critical for reducing cavities, particularly among low-income and marginalized people who can’t otherwise afford preventative dental care.
“We are disappointed that we will miss the opportunity to strengthen our community’s health through water fluoridation,” Healthy Teeth Hillsboro, the pro-fluoride political action committee, said in a statement. “Skeptics have long used misinformation and scare tactics regarding fluoridation and it appears they have succeeded again.”
But opponents like North, who now lives in Massachusetts, voiced concern about the potential negative health effects of fluoride, especially for children.
“You don’t have to know anything about science to know that you shouldn’t be forced to ingest a drug that you don’t want,” said North. “And we got that point across, I think very well, and that as much as anything resonated with the voters.”
Nationally, the practice of putting fluoride in drinking water is on shaky ground in the wake of a federal court ruling that ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to strengthen regulations around fluoride in drinking water.
In addition, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a former presidential candidate and vaccine skeptic seeking a public health role in President-elect Donald Trump’s administration, told NPR Wednesday that the administration would recommend removing fluoride from drinking water nationwide.
“We don’t need fluoride in our water,” Kennedy said. “It’s a very bad way to deliver it into our systems.”
Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral that, in small amounts, has been shown to reduce tooth decay.
Experts “have not found convincing scientific evidence linking community water fluoridation with any potential adverse health effect or systemic disorder” like cancer, Down syndrome, heart disease and more,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The National Institutes of Health also says that consuming very large amounts of fluoride could have negative health effects, including nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea and, among youths, dental problems. Other studies have raised concerns around whether fluoridated drinking presents a risk for lowering children’s IQ.
In September, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen said in the federal case that it’s not certain that putting fluoride in drinking water lowers children’s IQ, but noted that research indicates there is an unreasonable risk that it might.
“Fluoridation is a house of cards,” said North, the former CEO of the Oregon chapter of the American Cancer Society. “It’s going to fall.”
Related: Fluoride in drinking water poses enough risk to merit new EPA action, judge says
People for and against fluoride acknowledged that the recent federal ruling around fluoride likely played a role in voters’ opposition.
“I think really this is a matter of poor timing in my opinion,” said Dr. Beth Mossman, who advocated for fluoridated drinking water in Hillsboro, where she works as a pediatrician.
Mossman also blamed the measures’ failures on groups spreading misinformation about fluoride, adding: “Unfortunately, fear works.”
Removing fluoride from Oregonians’ drinking water, Mossman said, would be a “very dangerous move” that could have wide-ranging effects That includes longer wait times for dental care and increased costs for CareOregon, the state’s Medicaid program, because more people would need care for tooth decay.
“The loss of fluoridation in our state is already a liability to taxpayers,” Mossman said. “It would be an even greater liability.”
Dozens of cities across the United States fluoridate their water so any federal action will have ripple effects. That includes Beaverton, Forest Grove and about 15,000 Hillsboro residents who are served by the Tualatin Valley Water District, which puts fluoride in the water.
