“As someone who believes deeply in NTP’s science-based mission, I am concerned by the recent course of events with the fluoride monograph. The decision to set aside the results of an external peer review process based on concerns expressed by agencies with strong policy interests on fluoride suggests the presence of political interference in what should be a strictly scientific endeavor.” –Dr. Linda Birnbaum, former NTP director 2009-2019
In a perfect world, science and politics would remain completely independent of one another. Sadly this is not the world within which we live. I share the following information of ‘Fluoride on Trial’ not as a means to debate any political position. I see my job as a dentist to keep you informed on topics that affect your oral health. The recent research I have done and the information I have learned about the harms of fluoride overexposure I find alarming, especially for the most vulnerable amongst us, our children and grandchildren. I feel a social responsibility to share this information since our media and the American Dental Association have had a complete blackout of this monumental trial.
Today’s the day that water fluoridation, a public health measure spanning more than 70 years, is on trial in San Francisco, California. Judge Edward Chen will be presiding over the presentation of scientific evidence related to the neurotoxicity of fluoride exposure on the developing brain. There is an interesting but not a surprising history behind the lawsuit and the suppression of the science.
November 2016, several non profits (Fluoride Action Network, Food and Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, Moms Against Fluoride and others) petitioned the EPA to ban fluoridation due to the chemical’s neurotoxicity. They used the law, The Toxic Substances Control Act to file this petition against the government. The EPA filed a motion to dismiss the case.
December 2017 Court denies the EPA’s motion to dismiss
February 2018 Court denies the EPA’s request to limit review to the administrative record that would allow important information from new scientific studies published since the case was originally filed.
June 2020 Judge Chen heard arguments from both sides and admitted that the plaintiffs presented ‘serious evidence’ that raises ‘serious questions’ about the safety of continuing water fluoridation. Judge Chen delayed the trial until completion of the NTP report and the benchmark dose analysis completed by the NIH.
Emails obtained via FOIA for this trial demonstrate that the CDC, the FDA, the NIDCR (National Institute for Dental and Craniofacial Research) were very alarmed by the results of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) report:
April 2022 Dr. Mary Wolf of the NTP sent an email to the above agencies announcing completion of the report and a summary of their findings. She announced that the report will be published May 18, 2022
April-May 2022 A flurry of emails between agencies demonstrate concern over this report being made public. The CDC was “proactively and pre-emptively taking action” because they want to continue to promote “safety and efficacy” at the levels we fluoridate in the US. They requested the NTP ‘adjust’ their findings.
May 2022 The NTP CONFIRMS their findings and NO REVISIONS are necessary.
June 2022 Assistant Secretary of Health Lavine stalled publishing the report and to this day the NTP report has not been officially completed and released.
Findings From NTP Report
Some 72 studies were considered and the vast majority demonstrated that with increased exposure to fluoride there were IQ deficits found in children. Consistency in direction of the association and accounting for a wide variety of covariates, “all served to rule out the possibility that there is a common factor other than fluoride exposure that can account for this outcome.”
Findings From Benchmark Dose Analysis
Increased urine fluoride levels in pregnant women were associated with ADHD symptoms in children.
Over the course of the next 14 days, this trial will be taking place and the judge has agreed to allow the public to view. If you have any interest in this discussion and process, I would encourage you to check it out HERE.
This is a complicated topic, a very heavy discussion for a dentist brought up with the instruction and teaching that fluoride saves teeth. I feel compelled by the evidence from both sides that fluoride has both a benefit and a potential harm. The topical application of fluoride via toothpaste and treatments is recognized by the CDC as the PRIMARY benefit to the dentition.
In closing, it is an absolute honor to care for each of you. I don’t take the responsibility lightly and I thank you for the opportunity to be part of your life. For my pregnant mothers and parents of young children, I would urge you to avoid fluoridated water based on the evidence in court today. In the coming weeks, I plan to cover more discussions of how to keep your teeth healthy using natural re-mineralizing agents.
Most Sincerely,
Jessica
