Why Water Fluoridation Is Still In Dispute.
Also: Fluoridation Is A State & Local Issue, Can The Federal Gov Get Involved?
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is taking a seat before senators today in an attempt to secure his bid to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. He has said we do not need fluoride in our water.
This post is not an endorsement of him. He is an environmental lawyer, and our paths have crossed over the years. Like him or hate him, he has brought the issue of fluoridation in our water to the mainstream.
I’m committed to offering you information with the best evidence and research, along with my own point of view. It’s up to you to decide what you think about these issues and how you will take action. We can argue all day on our opinions and hopes for the future, but we can’t lose sight of the need for clean water, clean air, clean soil, and healthy, happy communities.
I say this because the readers of this newsletter are as divided as our nation. Half of you voted for our current admin and are eager for change, while half of you did not and are scared and upset about the future of this country.
Listen, I know I’m not going to please everyone. But if you know me at all, you know I’m not going to stop talking either.
Now, let’s talk about fluoride.
The U.S. EPA states: “Fluoride is an inorganic ion found in drinking water because of its presence in the earth's crust, anthropogenic releases to the environment, and/or due to its addition to treated water to prevent cavities.”
My career has been about making people aware of harmful exposures, and the deception that often accompanies those exposures.
In simplest terms, I believe that drinking water fluoridation takes away people’s freedom to choose what they take into their bodies. Public drinking water should never be used to distribute any substance for the purpose of achieving a medical result.
If we want to medicate our drinking water, why not add vitamin D, as about 40 percent of U.S. adults are deficient? More than 80 percent of people in this country don’t consume the recommended intake of vegetables. Should we add greens powder to the water?
No, we don’t do that. But for some reason, we’ve continued with the public health initiative of water fluoridation to reduce dental cavities and improve overall oral health in adults and children.
Like taking a supplement, we have other ways for those who want fluoride to access it—through toothpaste, mouthwash, and dental treatments. In fact, many scientists now worry that people may be “overdosing” because of exposure in their water and other topical sources.
I’m particularly concerned about families in communities using fluoridated drinking water from their tap to mix infant milk formula. As I will discuss, the science is looking particularly at how fluoride can negatively impact developing brains.
I also think many disadvantaged communities may not have the financial means to avoid higher doses of fluoride in their drinking water, taking away their freedom to choose what goes into their bodies.
The science on fluoride continues to evolve.
Since the first U.S. community began fluoridating its water, concerns have been raised and many communities choose not to fluoridate. In recent years, a growing scrutiny of the practice has played out in the scientific literature.
A 2024 report from an independent group that systematically analyzes scientific research found only a slight benefit in adding fluoride to tap water, leading to slightly fewer cavities in children’s baby teeth. That report found that prior to 1975, the practice may have had benefit, but today, it’s less likely.
Another recent review from the National Toxicology Program, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, looked at studies conducted in Canada, China, India, Iran, Pakistan, and Mexico and concluded that drinking water containing more than 1.5 milligrams of fluoride per liter is consistently associated with lower IQs in children.
While the report did not quantify how many IQ points might be lost at various levels of fluoride exposure, some of the studies reviewed in the report suggested IQ was 2 to 5 points lower in children who’d had higher exposures.
After that report came out a federal judge made a determination about the neurodevelopmental risks to children for the recommended U.S. water fluoride level, in one of “the most historic ruling in the U.S. fluoridation debate that we’ve ever seen.”
That’s according to Ashley Malin, a University of Florida researcher who has studied the effect of higher fluoride levels in pregnant women.
“Today’s ruling represents an important acknowledgement of a large and growing body of science indicating serious human health risks associated with fluoridated drinking water,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch in a statement. “This court looked at the science and acted accordingly.”
The judge concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk, asking the EPA to take steps to lower that risk.
The EPA is appealing the ruling.
Debates in many parts of the country carry on about whether to continue fluoridation.
It’s also important to note that these studies are observational. The first randomized controlled trial of fluoridated water is ongoing at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Interestingly, the federal government does not have legal authority to require state and local communities to fluoridate their water nor to remove fluoridation in areas where it is already policy. These decisions, like many public health policies, are made at the state and local levels.
The EPA does have the authority to set and regulate the maximum level of fluoridation in public water systems. But it’s up to municipalities to set their own water fluoride doses, most of them set them around 0.7 milligrams per liter of water.
It’s unclear whether a federal agency can change course on water fluoridation in the U.S. We shall see….
How did we get here?
Fluoride is a mineral that can help prevent tooth decay by strengthening the protective outer layer of enamel that can be worn down by acids formed by bacteria, plaque, and sugars in the mouth.
In the early 1900s, clinical observations of children living in Colorado and Texas with naturally higher levels of fluoride in the water were shown to have less caries, the scientific term for tooth decay.
In 1944, the city commission in Grand Rapids, Michigan, voted to approve a pilot fluoridation project for their community drinking water system.
A few months later, the Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) published an editorial warning against rushing to fluoridate drinking water, and then in a follow-up piece another editorial walks back that criticism emphasizing the need for more research before fluoridation can be considered an acceptable public health intervention.
By 1980, half of the U.S. population has fluoridated tap water. See more of the history of how it all unfolded here. Now, more than 70 percent of us drink fluoridated water or about 200 million people.
Communities in the U.S. add fluoride to water on a voluntary basis. In other parts of the world, like Europe, fluoridated drinking water is rare.
The American Water Works Association (AWWA) supports the fluoridation of public water supplies as a public health benefit, as does the American Dental Association (ADA).
Want to know if your community’s tap water has fluoride? Check out this map.
Want to get involved with this issue? Check out Fluoride Action Network.
Interesting that I have an old small paperback and my own dentist in Sacramento that are against it. Turns out that it's a waste by-product of metals, fertilizer, ceramics, & many sites of the Atomic Energy Commission. And, no surprise, it cost a lot to eliminate this poison; until a way to make money off of it was sold to the public. (The book title is "The Shocking Truth about Water , by Paul C. Bragg, N.D., PhD. , by Health Science in California.)