Fluoride EPA lawsuit update

A message from the attorney representing the Fluoride Action Network in the federal TSCA case against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Michael Connett: 

“Our case continues against the EPA for its ongoing failure to protect the public from the neurologic risks posed by the fluoridation chemicals added to public drinking water. At the close of trial this summer, the Judge stated that we had presented “serious evidence” which presents “serious questions” about the safety of fluoridation. The Judge also noted that EPA had used an incorrect standard for assessing the available science. 

These were encouraging assessments from the Court, but the Court has yet to issue a ruling. Instead, the Court ordered that we allow EPA the opportunity to give the evidence a “second look,” which we have now done. On November 4, we submitted a supplemental petition to the EPA, which contains the findings of the NTP’s systematic review, as well as the findings of the NIH-funded birth cohort studies. EPA is currently reviewing this material. 

The next step in the case will be a hearing on January 7 (which was originally scheduled for December 10). At this hearing, the Court will hear argument on a procedural motion that EPA has filed to dismiss the case. EPA’s motion is the latest in a long series of efforts by EPA to do anything other than apply its risk assessment procedures to protect the public from the risks posed by fluoride exposure. 

For those who are interested in learning more about our lawsuit, and what we have learned so far, here are two videos. The first is a presentation I gave at a Forum organized by FAN in Spokane, Washington”

JAMA JAW DROPPING STUDY – explored by JAMA editors in a podcast. Important to listen and watch, because..

1) the importance of this US government-funded study itself;

2) the honest and open way these editors admitted their own ignorance on the scientific literature with respect to the harm fluoride may cause and its neurotoxicity in particular;

3) their previous acceptance of the “safe and effective” mantra dished up to them by their professional bodies – virtually without question;

4) their surprise to find that most of the civilized world is not fluoridated and finally,

5) their advice that pregnant women should avoid fluoride.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s