A conclusive meta-analysis on fluoride from the National Toxicology Program was released this month as part of a lawsuit involving Fluoride Action Network and the EPA. The former is arguing to have fluoride removed from water supplies and listed as a toxic substance under the TSCA of 1976. Fluoride was first introduced into drinking water in 1945, based on limited associations that when present in water some people had less cavities. Mass fluoridation began in the 1960s. Since then it as been well documented that fluoride, and its many different varieties, usually mixed with metals, can only have associated and limited positive affects on teeth with kept under 0.7mg/liter of water. Despite this, the lowest EPA limit has been 2mg/L and even up to 4mg/L, though many areas in the us contain “fluoride levels at 4mg/L or higher,” according to the National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine in 2006. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Register wrote In 2003 that “small amounts of fluoride help prevent tooth cavities, but high levels can harm your health.” The NASEM report concluded that “children exposed to the current maximum allowable connotation risk developing severe tooth enamel fluorosis…enamel loss, and pitting of the teeth.” Whether high or low, these doses are uncontrolled, usually over the EPA limit already, which is also just a recommendation, and have no consideration to fluoride exposure from other drinks, foods, drugs, etc., certainly blasting a person’s daily intake to extremely high levels. Let us not forget that a lot of tooth decay is caused by diets saturated in processed foods and sugars too. A meta-analysis from 2012 further found that “children in high-fluoridated areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who livd in low-fluoridated areas.” A JAMA Pediatrics article from 2019 found that “1-milligram higher daily intake of fluoride among pregnant women was associated with a 3.66 lower IQ score… in boys and girls.” However, the US Department of health can still claim in 2015 that fluoride can have “preventative benefits.” Yes, it can, “at 0.7mg/L,” and benefits that are only possible, not guaranteed. The accumulation of the substance naturally and artificially is more than cause for concern; it is cause for removing it from the water immediately where it is added by recommendation without knowledge or consent of the public. The US Federal government even acknowledged this in 2015 when the Department of Health and Human Services updated its recommendations that fluoride levels should never exceed 0.7mg/L. Even at so-called safe levels, it is not meant to be ingested!

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/fluoride/documents_provided_bsc_wg_031523.pdf

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/cdc-experts-say-fluoridated-water-is-safe-contrary-to-rfk-jr-s-warnings/

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/epdf/10.1289/ehp.1104912

https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2006/03/epa-standard-for-fluoride-in-drinking-water-is-not-protective-tooth-enamel-loss-bone-fractures-of-concern-at-high-levels

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547570/pdf/phr130000318.pdf

https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/CRC/PDF/Public/7030.00.pdf

https://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=211&toxid=38

https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/harvard-study-strong-link-between-fluoridated-water-and-bone-cancer-boys

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/11571/fluoride_brief_final.pdf

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/federal-government-calls-for-lowering-fluoride-levels-in-drinking-water/

https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/national-academy-calls-lowering-fluoride-limits-tap-water

https://www.nidcr.nih.gov/health-info/fluoride/the-story-of-fluoridation#:~:text=In%201945%2C%20Grand%20Rapids%20became,the%20Institute%27s%20inception%20in%201948.