The San Francisco Federal Court has ordered the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take a second look at a
petition to require the EPA to complete a proper risk assessment of fluoride, which it has failed to do.
This will mean the high quality studies published in the last few years must be included for review – studies that
confirm fluoride irrevocably and significantly damages our children’s brains during early development, both in the womb
and for the first 6 – 12 months of life. This is especially serious for bottle-fed babies.
The Judge said in his summation, “So much has changed since the petition was filed…two significant series of studies –
respective cohort studies – which everybody agrees is the best methodology. Everybody agrees that these were rigorous
studies and everybody agrees that these studies would be part of the best available scientific evidence. The EPA appears
to have applied a standard of causation, which from my reading of TSCA is not accurate. It’s not a proper allocation.
It’s not the proper standard.”
The judge says he is ready to rule on the evidence but would like to give the US EPA the opportunity to do its job.
The Court will meet again on 6th of August where a pathway forward, that has been agreed to by the plaintiffs, Fluoride
Action Network, will be presented. The Plaintiff's lawyer, Michael Connett, has said that the US EPA has dragged its
feet.
Fluoride Action Network and others brought a petition to the federal court arguing that the EPA had not performed a risk
assessment on fluoride as they are required to do under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
FAN and others provided world class experts of the highest order - experts that the EPA has consistently depended on for
assessments and on which it based its regulations on lead and mercury.
The experts said, in summary, "These new prospective studies are of very high quality and show very similar results,
thus leaving little doubt that developmental neurotoxicity is a serious risk associated with elevated fluoride exposure,
including at the purportedly “optimal” levels of exposure for caries prevention. This evidence shows that community
water fluoridation is associated with IQ losses that are substantial and of economic and societal concern."
The EPA acknowledged that the court could rule fluoridation posed an unreasonable risk [of neurological harm] even if it
has not been absolutely proven.