Sonoma County Fluoride fighters working with national cause update, even China stopped use
Fluoride Action Network | 10 Facts About Fluoride
Far from giving fluoride a clean bill of health, the NAS called upon scientists to investigate if current fluoride exposures in the United States are contributing to chronic health problems, like bone disorders, thyroid disease, low intelligence, dementia, and diabetes, particularly in people who are most vulnerable to fluoride’s effects.
UPDATE: Friends, Paul Connett sends the update below, which includes an
explanation of what happened at last week’s TSCA EPA trial status
hearing (4/22/2021). Carol/Clean Water Sonoma-Marin
Good news! Last Thursday, the Judge granted Plaintiffs’ motion to add
additional standing evidence into the case, which should help fully
satisfy the Judge’s prior concerns on this issue and ensure that the
case is resolved on the merits.
The Judge also made clear that he is very keen to read the National
Toxicology Program’s finalized report on fluoride’s neurotoxicity, which
is expected sometime later this year, as well as other new science on
the issue, including an upcoming pooled analysis of the NIH-funded birth
In order to consider this new science, the Judge discussed having a
“phase 2 trial” where Plaintiffs and EPA can introduce additional expert
testimony on the NTP report and other developments.
The next status hearing will be on August 26 at 10:30AM (Pacific US).
While the plaintiffs believe they have already presented sufficient
evidence to demonstrate that fluoridation poses an unacceptable risk,
they appreciate the seriousness with which the Judge is taking the case,
and his commitment to having the science govern the result.
Since its formation in 2000, the Fluoride Action Network has believed
that when scientists and the public learn of the poor science
underpinning water fluoridation, that the practice would fall under its
own weight. That belief has steadily grown as more and more scientific
research has shown the dangers fluoride poses to a number of tissues
including the teeth, the bone, the kidneys, the endocrine system and
particularly the brain.
All of this science we have meticulously cataloged in our health
database and shared with visitors to our website. But this educational
exercise has not been a simple matter – against us every step of the way
has been an entrenched lobby, including both dental interests and the
public health bureaucracies in largely English speaking countries – who
refuse to give up this practice. For them fluoridation has always been
and always will be “safe and effective.”
No amount of science will change their minds. Given a level playing
ground they would be laughed out of court. Hitherto, they have had the
power to convince the world that “black is white.” But now we are
actually in court and it is a level playing field!
In light of this, the Judge’s keen interest in following the science has
been, and remains, a welcome development. Although he didn’t say it, the
Judge’s comments suggest that he doesn’t want to hear any more
obfuscation from EPA in lieu of science, and that they can’t win this
case by simply appealing to their authority.
Paul Connett, PhD
Director, Fluoride Action Network