Press "Enter" to skip to content

The End of Fluoridation Is in Sight

Water fluoridation is one of the most important public well being failures of the 20th century. Despite stable scientific proof of hurt, politics and public relations have saved the follow alive.

Proponents, together with the American Dental Association (ADA) and the Oral Health Division of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), have spent thousands and thousands of {dollars} on promotion and public relations to promote fluoridation utilizing half-truths, convincing speaking factors, and diversions.

But fluoridation can be one of essentially the most broadly rejected well being interventions on Earth, with 95% of the world’s inhabitants consuming water from programs that aren’t fluoridated.

For the previous decade, the development has moved in the route of communities ending the follow, not beginning it. And now, as a result of an abundance of new analysis, a landmark lawsuit and the sustained advocacy and training efforts of the Fluoride Action Network and its supporters such as you, the follow might be on the brink of extinction.

The Evidence of Harm Is Too Great To Be Ignored

All tissues are vital, however an important organ to guard throughout fetal and toddler improvement is the mind. Damage occurring to this organ throughout these early phases of life is everlasting and can’t be undone later in life.

The proof of neurotoxic hurt from water fluoridation has been mounting at an unprecedented charge in latest years, and has rapidly change into essentially the most pressing purpose to finish the follow as quickly as potential. A cavity can simply be crammed, however harm to a toddler’s mind is everlasting.

A big physique of government-funded analysis now signifies that fluoride is neurotoxic and is associated with lowered IQ in kids and a major improve in ADHD analysis and associated behaviors in kids at doses skilled in fluoridated communities. Experts in the sphere have likened the scale of the impact to that from lead.

This consists of over 200 animal research exhibiting that extended publicity to various ranges of fluoride can harm the mind, 65 human studies linking reasonably excessive fluoride exposures with decreased intelligence, three human research linking fluoride publicity with impaired fetal brain improvement, and seven Mother-Offspring studies linking fluoride publicity throughout being pregnant to decreased IQ in offspring.

Over the previous yr, we have additionally seen unprecedented new science from Canada and the USA exhibiting fluoride harms the growing mind from exposures due primarily to synthetic water fluoridation on the “optimal level.” Several of these high-quality research had been funded by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (previously the National Institutes of Health).

Strongest Studies Published Over the Past Year

Seven research printed in 2019 and 2020 are among the many strongest but, and are clearly related to water fluoridation as they had been performed in communities with what the ADA considers the “optimal level” of fluoride in ingesting water. These embrace:

  1. Green 2019 printed in the Journal of the American Medical Association’s journal on Pediatrics. It reported substantial IQ loss in Canadian kids from prenatal publicity to fluoride from water fluoridation.
  2. Riddell 2019 printed in Environment International. It discovered a stunning 284% improve in the prevalence of ADHD amongst kids in fluoridated communities in Canada in comparison with nonfluoridated ones.
  3. Till 2020 printed in Environment International. It reported that kids who had been bottle-fed in Canadian fluoridated communities misplaced as much as 9 IQ factors in comparison with these in nonfluoridated communities.
  4. Uyghurturk 2020 printed in Environmental Health. It discovered that pregnant ladies in fluoridated communities in California had considerably larger ranges of fluoride in their urine than these in nonfluoridated communities. The ranges discovered in their urine had been the identical as these discovered to decrease the IQ of the fetus in Green et al, 2019 and Bashash et al, 2017.
  5. Malin 2019 printed in Environmental Health. It linked a doubling of signs indicative of sleep apnea in adolescents in the U.S. to ranges of fluoride in the ingesting water. The hyperlink between fluoride and sleep disturbances could also be by way of fluoride’s impact on the pineal gland.
  6. Malin 2019 printed in Environment International. It reported that publicity to fluoridated water led to a discount in kidney and liver perform amongst adolescents in the U.S., and instructed these with poorer kidney or liver perform might take in extra fluoride our bodies. The CDC funded this research.

The claims made by proponents of fluoridation that there’s solely “one or two studies” discovering hurt, or that they’re solely from areas with naturally excessive fluoride ranges, are now not related. The scientific proof can now be thought of overwhelming and plain. In reality, the extent of proof that fluoride is neurotoxic now far exceeds the proof that was in place when lead was banned from gasoline.

A recent review by Danish scientist, Harvard professor and neurotoxicity skilled Philippe Grandjean, MD, DMSc, additionally concluded that:

“… there is little doubt that developmental neurotoxicity is a serious risk associated with elevated fluoride exposure, whether due to community water fluoridation, natural fluoride release from soil minerals, or tea consumption, especially when the exposure occurs during early development.”

It ought to come as no shock then, {that a} draft systematic review printed in 2020 by the National Toxicology Program of human research of fluoride’s neurotoxicity concluded that fluoride was a “presumed” neurotoxin primarily based on the big quantity, high quality and consistency of mind research.

The assessment recognized 149 human research and 339 animal research, however didn’t embrace the three most up-to-date neurotoxicity-related research from the York University group (Till 2019; Riddell 2019), or the research exhibiting that girls in the U.S. had ranges of fluoride in urine excessive sufficient to trigger harm to the mind of the fetus (Uyghurturk 2020).

While the draft NTP assessment is equivocal about results at low exposures, these latest high-quality mother-child research assist a conclusion that artificially fluoridated water causes substantial IQ reductions. This reality was lately echoed in a letter published in Pediatric Research by the co-authors of the JAMA Pediatrics fluoride/IQ research, which stated:

“Over the previous 75 years, well being authorities have declared that neighborhood water fluoridation-a follow that reaches over 400 million worldwide-is secure. Yet, research performed in North America analyzing the protection of fluoride publicity in being pregnant had been nonexistent.

When a Canadian research reported that larger fluoride publicity in pregnant ladies was related to decrease IQ scores in younger kids, critics attacked the methodology of the research and discounted the importance of the outcomes.

Health authorities continued to conclude that fluoride is unequivocally secure, regardless of 4 well-conducted research over the past Three years constantly linking fluoride publicity in being pregnant with antagonistic neurodevelopmental results in offspring …

The tendency to disregard new proof that doesn’t conform to widespread beliefs impedes the response to early warnings about fluoride as a possible developmental neurotoxin. Evolving proof ought to encourage scientists and well being authorities to re-evaluate claims in regards to the security of fluoride, particularly for the fetus and toddler for whom there isn’t any profit.”

FAN Leads the Fight Against Neurotoxins

Since 2000, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has been dedicated to lowering publicity to fluoride, and even with all of the science firmly on our facet, we could not await legislators and public well being officers to forged apart their entrenched dogma in favor of fluoridation and make amends for the science. Instead, we initiated the authorized course of to finish the follow that as we speak impacts greater than 200 million Americans.

Just a little-known provision of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) gave us our alternative. It provides residents a option to circumvent the corruption and pressure the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban or restrict the use of poisonous substances.

Watchdog teams now not need to persuade the EPA of unreasonable threat; they will now have an goal decide determine primarily based on an impartial assessment of the proof.

We are additionally laying the foundation for future TSCA challenges by residents and environmental teams. For instance, as a result of of Judge Edward Chen’s ruling to deny the EPA’s motion to dismiss our case, TSCA legislation will now be interpreted to permit the EPA to be petitioned to manage single makes use of of substances, reasonably all makes use of, which was the EPA’s place. This change will make it simpler for activists to pressure the EPA to assessment the dangers of particular chemical substances used commercially.

While it has been 4 years since this effort started in November of 2016 — when the Fluoride Action Network, along with a coalition of nonprofits and particular person residents, presented a petition to the EPA to finish the deliberate addition of fluoridation chemical substances to the general public’s ingesting water — it has really taken 20 years of effort by FAN to deliver us so far.

It took the event of our intensive web site in the early days. It took the creation of our complete well being database (bigger than any authorities had put collectively on fluoride’s toxicity).

It took numerous submissions to authorities businesses and the interpretation of many Chinese neurotoxicity research and far more. And, after a lot delay as a result of authorities shut downs and Covid-19, our day in court docket lastly arrived.

Trial of the Century

The trial started with a gap assertion from the legal professional for the plaintiffs, Michael Connett. He made the succinct however highly effective case that fluoride presents a hazard (risk to the mind); that this hazard is a threat on the doses skilled in fluoridated communities; and that it’s an unreasonable threat.

The EPA, represented by attorneys from the Department of Defense, argued that establishing fluoride as a neurotoxic hazard requires a scientific assessment, which they claimed FAN’s specialists did not carry out.

They additionally argued that the proof exhibiting hurt from fluoride on the ranges discovered in communities that follow fluoridation wasn’t robust sufficient to yield motion from the EPA. Both of these claims can be disproven by FAN’s specialists and legal professional in the course of the trial.

This was adopted by three days of testimony from FAN’s skilled witnesses, all impartial and main scientists whose world-class experience consists of fluoride, neurotoxicity and threat assessments, and whose experience the EPA has relied on in the previous on different toxicants like lead and mercury. The witnesses included (click on on hyperlinks to see their declarations and resumes):

Their testimony was adopted by the EPA’s witnesses, two of which had been experts-for-hire from the company consulting agency Exponent, and one was a threat evaluation skilled from the EPA.

It was revealed that the EPA paid Exponent roughly $350,000 for his or her testimony, which was centered totally on claiming that there was inadequate proof of hurt — one thing they’re identified for doing in each trial, irrespective of who they’re representing or how robust the science is.

One of their witnesses, Dr. Ellen Chang, has a protracted historical past of defending and producing systematic evaluations for company polluters, together with for DOW Chemical’s Agent Orange, Monsanto’s glyphosate, 3M’s PFOAs, and pesticides from Syngenta and Croplife. She additionally labored for the American Chemistry Council, American Petroleum Institute, and the Manganese Interest Group.

Several paragraphs right here could not probably do the in-depth proceedings of the trial justice, or spotlight all of the stunning and unbelievable statements that had been made. I might urge you to learn our detailed summaries for every of the trial days.

I might additionally urge you to go to our TSCA trial overview page, the place you could find the essential details, a timeline of all actions and rulings, hyperlinks to all of the submissions made by FAN, hyperlinks to all of the media protection, and hyperlinks to the research we relied upon to make our case. You may go to our Twitter web page, the place we supplied dwell tweet protection of days Three by way of 7.

The Judge’s Reaction

After seven days of trial and shutting statements from each events, the decide held off on making a closing ruling, however he did make it pretty apparent that he was satisfied that FAN fluoride was a neurotoxin and certain posed an unreasonable threat. He stated that the EPA had didn’t correctly assess that threat, and illegitimately turned down FAN’s 2016 petition for TSCA motion.

The decide urged the events to spend the subsequent few weeks discussing the likelihood of an amended TSCA petition and evaluation by the EPA, or begin a brand new petition and have the EPA conduct a correct assessment, and depart his closing ruling till that’s full. Both events expressed doubt that such an association can be fruitful, however finally agreed to maneuver ahead with it and replace the court docket on their progress in the start of August.

We Expect the EPA Could Continue to Delay

We do not count on the overzealous proponents of the fluoridation, together with the EPA, CDC and ADA, to roll over with out utilizing each avenue potential to avoid wasting their credibility by defending fluoridation. They’ve already confirmed repeatedly, they’ve deep pockets and no disgrace.

Proponents do not appear to understand that continued promotion will trigger an ever-increasing loss of the general public’s belief in the businesses that should defend them. Continuing this follow in the absence of sound science — and investing thousands and thousands of {dollars} in PR to cowl up that reality — will additional erode the general public’s belief in public well being packages.

Right now, the one factor being protected is a failed coverage and the fame of those that refuse to just accept that this program has been a large failure each ethically and scientifically.

Before the trial the EPA had already intimated that they might enchantment a ruling in our favor, and that even when we win the enchantment the rulemaking course of to finish fluoridation’s neurotoxic hurt might take as much as three years. This would imply tens of hundreds extra kids completely harmed by fluoridation.

This is why, regardless of the last word verdict, FAN will proceed to wish your assist. We have solid this precedent-setting path collectively. Your assist, contributions and sharing of our trigger and authorized case have performed a vital position in making this occur, and we thanks. Whether we win or lose this trial, our vital training efforts should proceed.

Please take into account investing in an finish to fluoridation by making a tax-deductible donation to our work.

Also, please take into account signing-up to receive FAN’s email bulletins and following us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram. We will maintain you knowledgeable in regards to the newest fluoride analysis and information, plus provide you with alternatives assist affect fluoride coverage in your space and all through the world.

New Tools and Resources to Educate Leaders About Neurotoxicity

While FAN is taking the lead in court docket on the federal and state degree, and serving to campaigners on the native degree to teach decision-makers and public well being officers, we’d like your assist to unfold this instructional marketing campaign to each neighborhood, together with yours. To make the duty simpler, we’ve got created a quantity of new instructional supplies.

First, is our handout on neurotoxicity. We have each a color version together with a black and white version for cheaper bulk printing, in addition to a list of the references for this handout that you would be able to mix to make a pleasant double-sided handout in case you so select. You may try our different handouts here.

Second, FAN’s Research Director, Chris Neurath, filmed a Zoom webinar in which he introduced detailed proof that fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin.

He described the quickly accumulating peer-reviewed science exhibiting that fluoride lowers the IQ of kids and will increase their threat of neurobehavioral issues like ADHD. He put these research into perspective in methods we will all perceive.

This video a powerful tool for campaigners and fogeys trying to study the science and to share it with decision-makers. Neurath’s presentation is about 50 minutes and features a 30-minute query and reply session that happened on the finish. Click here to access the PowerPoint slides used in this presentation.

Help educate your state-level resolution makers in regards to the neurotoxic hurt attributable to water fluoridation. Use our easy automated electronic mail system to ship Neurath’s presentation to your state legislators and urge them to introduce a invoice subsequent session to finish the follow all through your state: Educate Your Legislators NOW.

FAN has additionally produced a brand new video collection entitled, “Four Game-Changing Studies,” explaining the science behind fluoridation’s neurotoxicity in 4 brief movies that includes Paul Connett, Ph.D. The shorter format makes the content material simpler to share on social media and simpler for native authorities to digest incrementally.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *