Barbara TritzFluoride has been in the news lately and not in a good way.
Dentistry has praised the ability of fluoride to reduce tooth decay- but it has come at a very high cost for our society. And, many people in government and in groups we have put our trust have turned a blind eye to the damages fluoride has wrought in the brain as well as throughout the entire body.
FAN vs the EPA
Seven years ago, under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA), the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Moms Against Fluoridation, Food and Water Watch, The American Academy of Environmental Medicine, The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, and several individuals representing both themselves and their children petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2016 to end the addition of fluoridation chemicals into U.S. drinking water due to fluoride’s neurotoxicity. The EPA denied the petition. Under TSCA, citizens are allowed to petition the EPA to evaluate whether a chemical presents an unreasonable risk to public health or susceptible populations.
The federal National Toxicology Program, an arm of the Department of Health and Human Services, did a systematic review of the research and concluded that yes, fluoride is a neurotoxin. The NTP started this review in 2016 and released its final report in May 2024. This review found there was indeed a large body of research evidence that confirmed fluoride exposure is “consistently associated with lower IQ in children“.
The wheels of justice turn slowly but turn they do. Last month, after seven long years weaving its way through the court system, on September 24th 2024 Senior Judge Edward Chen of the United States District Court of the Northern District of California ruled that water fluoridation does present an “unreasonable risk” to the health of children. The EPA will now be required to regulate fluoride as a health hazard. They cannot ignore the risk.
The lawyers for FAN were able to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that fluoride at levels we have currently in our drinking water (0.7 mg/L) affects the cognitive function of our unborn babies. The research consistently shows that water fluoridation reduces the IQ of our unborn babies and young children from one to seven points.
The Trial Truths Came Out
During trial, the EPA trial experts were forced to admit:
#1. As of 2019, The EPA admitted it had no studies that proved a developing fetus was safe from the neurotoxicity of fluoride. The EPA only had studies showing harm to the fetus. Fluoride passes through the placenta and the blood-brain barrier.
#2. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) Oral Health Division Director, Casey Hannan had to admit his agency agreed with the National Research Council 2006 findings that fluorides “interfere with the function of the brain and body by direct and indirect means.” The person in charge of oral health at the CDC KNEW fluoride affected the brain back in 2006, yet did nothing with this information!
The 2006 committee that put together this report was instructed by the EPA to review health effects known only with “total certainty”. The committee was further “misdirected” by the EPA not to determine a safe level of fluoride and not to discuss silicofluorides. (The fluoride used in our water systems is a toxic waste by-product of the fertilizer companies wet scrubbers. It is not prescription fluoride.) The NRC committee knew 20 years ago that fluoride affected the brain, the endocrine system, the thyroid gland, bones, dementia and anatomical brain changes, the pineal gland, insulin, fertility, the immune system and so much more. They knew then that fluoride was hazardous to the human body.
I invite everyone who wants to review the report on fluoride in our water to read this almost 20 year old very revealing report. The final line of the summary of a review of this report:
“The recommended Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for fluoride in drinking
water should be zero.”
#3. Dr Karen Thiessen, a risk assessment scientist and member of the 2006 NRC committee that reviewed and authored this report stated that the EPA knew and was ignoring the neurotoxic risks water fluoridation posed to the public. Acknowledging these risks would have required the EPA to stop water fluoridation. She also noted that the evidence proving fluoride was more neurotoxic than other toxins the EPA already regulated.
#4. The Judge delayed the trial because he was waiting for the final National Toxicology program monograph, the analysis of the research that the NPT had started in 2016. The NTP monograph report was delayed, stalled, and hidden from viewing by the plaintiffs by order of Assistant Health Secretary, Rachel Levine “until further notice”. Through the Freedom of Information Act, the plaintiffs were able to have the draft version of the report released for their viewing which allowed the judge to set a new trial date.
#5. The American Dental Association (ADA) was kept in the loop regarding the contents of the report and was given the NTP draft to review so they could work to discredit it, while neither the public nor the plaintiffs were allowed to see the draft.
Results of Judge Chen’s Ruling
I have read Senior Judge Edward Chen’s 80-page ruling on water fluoridation. The judge did his due diligence and gave the evidence his complete and thoughtful review. He read the studies and understood the importance of this case. Judge Chen’s final ruling:
“The Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children…the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response.”
“In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health; it is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States…Reduced IQ poses serious harm. Studies have linked IQ decrements of even one or two points to, e.g., reduced educational attainment, employment status, productivity, and earned wages.”
The judge confirmed that water fluoridation, at the current level of 0.7mg/L is hazardous. During the trial, the EPA’s own expert acknowledged that fluoride was hazardous “at some level”. The research presented at the trial confirmed fluoride crossed the placenta and that it did indeed harm the brains of unborn babies, lowering their IQ. In all, 72 human epidemiological studies were presented. A large majority of these studies confirmed these results. Of the 19 high-quality studies, 18 consistently showed fluoride reduced IQ. The studies are listed in Judge Chen’s report if you would like to review them.
Research by Dr. Phillipe Grandjean et al confirmed that the brain development of the unborn was affected even at the low level of 0.2mg/L of fluoride. This research showed that for every 0.28mg/L of fluoride in the mother’s urine, the baby’s IQ decreased one point. Most mothers had a fluoride urine concentration of 0.8 mg/L to 1.89mg/L.
At the end of the trial, it was confirmed that fluoride in the water poses a hazard. Once a chemical is deemed a hazard, there needs to be a margin of safety of at least 10x to protect our most vulnerable populations. ( ex: Those who cannot excrete fluoride I.E. kidney patients, as well as athletes who drink lots of water, babies who drink formula made from tap water.) The NTP report set the hazard level at 1.5mg/L, and our waters are 0.7mg/L which is only a 2x level. To be at the 10x level, our fluoride should be reduced to a level of 0.15mg/L to get us down to a safe level.
It was determined by Dr. John Featherstone, a premier dental caries disease researcher in his research published in 1999, that water fluoridation does not reduce tooth decay- that the effects of the fluoride in our water actually work “post-eruptive and topically”. The Center for Disease Control repeated this in their CDC MMWR August 2001 report: “fluoride’s predominant effect is posteruptive and topical”.
Why are we still fluoridating our water? We have known for a fact this is a poisonous and hazardous chemical, especially to the most vulnerable in our society. Why was the government working so hard to hide the results of its own analysis? Who benefits from fluoridation?
This has all happened before…
Fluoride was part of the government’s secret bomb-making project- The Manhattan Project – in the 1940s and 50s. It was used to enrich uranium in making the atomic bomb. Documents declassified in 2010 revealed all the same lies, hidden research, pain, destruction of local farming communities, devastating illnesses affecting factory workers, and misinformation to hide the truths. Madison Avenue advertising geniuses were employed to make fluoride look safe. The dental community was used by the government to reassure the population fluoride was good for them. And it all worked.
For a riveting read, I invite you to the book by Christopher Bryson- The Fluoride Deception. You may never trust the government again. After the lies, obfuscation, and deceit of the current folks in power in our EPA, CDC, and HHS, I wouldn’t blame you.
Please join me on October 17th as I speak on oral health and fluoride at the online Biocidin Oral Health Summit. Oral Health Summit (biocidin.com) I would love to see you there!
Barbara Tritz BRDH
Protector of Brain and Body Health
Barbara great little article. The fluoride fight has been going on a long time. We fought against it in the 70s and 80s but no one would listen. The EPA is the only one strong enough to regulate the FDA and stop this neurotoxin from being added to our water and toothpastes.
Finally the science is catching up with the facts that we should be removing this neurotoxin from our water not adding it.
Keep up the good work. You have my appreciation and support for all you are doing to help people obtain and maintain optimal health and vitality.
Blessings,
Rev. Dr. Stephen A. Lawrence
Thank you Stephen,
Your kind words are greatly appreciated. Sadly, dentistry has been brainwashed to think fluoride should be the only thing that prevents tooth decay. And thus, we are poisoning the entire population. It is exciting to be part of the movement that is changing dentistry. We could not have done this without the hard work you did in the 70’s and 80’s. Truth does win out in the long run but whoa is it slow! Thank you for your continued support. It means a lot to me. Also, thanks for sharing your book – I am enjoying it. It has reignited my spiritual side.
Sincerely,
Barbara
In regards to areas that do NOT have water fluoridation, are the fluoride supplements given to babies in a dropper and children in a multivitamin posing the same risk?
Absolutely the same risk. Here is what it does within the body.https://queenofdentalhygiene.net/2023/02/fluoride-the-destroyer-see-the-dark-side/
~Barbara
Fabulous summary, Barbara!
There is no valid risk analysis that would approve fluoride in drinking water given the documented harm. And given the results of the October 2024 Cochrane Systematic Review, “Water fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries,” no reputable analyst would even bother to do a cost:benefit analysis because any clinically inconsequential reduction in cavities “may not be real.”
In other words, the magic potion fluoridation narrative is a tooth-fairy tale.
Thanks Karen, High praise from you! and so appreciated. and I love the tooth fairytale! Now the tooth-truth can come out.
~Barbara
ALOHA BARBARA, Thank you for such a great article, especially coming from an RDH. Been keeping it out of Hawaii’s water (except military bases) for 25 years. The irony is that in a CDC report in the late 1990’s, Hawaii, alleged to have the worst cavities in the country, also had the lowest rate of edentulism. Hawaii also is, or at least among, the healthiest states in the U.S. We also passed a county bill to protect Honolulu which contains a restriction against adding thermoluminescent phosphor (TLP) chemicals which, when exposed to xrays, make xrays bio-accumulative by generation of long lasting free radicals, leading to inflammation, and perhaps risk of cancer. Example of TLPs are calcium fluoride, fluorapatite or many metal+fluorine compounds.
In my opinion, this easily explains why all xrays/post surgery radiation therapy are a big risk factor for breast and lung cancers. Look up publications by Dr. John Gofman at “Committee for Nuclear Responsibility” who provides compellling evidence to claim that 75% of breast cancers are from xrays plus a possible co-actor.
Have a nice and safe Hoiday Season.
Hello Adrian!
So nice to hear from you again. Thank you for your kind words. And, wow, now I have another rabbit hole it explore. Thank you for sharing that information.
~Barbara
(The fluoride used in our water systems is a toxic waste by-product of the fertilizer companies wet scrubbers. It is not prescription fluoride.)
This wording is deceptive; a by-products happen often, juice from making fruit cups, okara from making tofu are a few examples of useful by-products. I wish they used more accurate and less inflammatory wording.
But Gina,
It is a “by product”. The phosphate fertilizer companies and the aluminum companies had to put pollution control devices on their smoke stacks. They capture the exhaust remains in the stacks which contains fluoride and that is what they sell to the water companies. If they did not sell it, they would have to pay to dispose of their toxic waste. What else would you call it but not a “by porduct”? I too was shocked that is where the fluoride in our water systems comes from. I had no idea until I did my own research, and let me tell you, they hide this information. It was not easy to find on-line.
The damage tht fluoride does to the body is also not mentioned, ever. Decay is the body’s cry for help and we ignore the greater systemic issues by claiming fluroide is the answer.
Thanks for reaching out,
Barbara
May I confirm that you are exclusively writing about fluoridated city water?
Are you stating factually that ALL city fluoridated water systems across the USA use: “The fluoride used in our water systems is a toxic waste by-product of the fertilizer companies wet scrubbers. It is not prescription fluoride.”?
I ask because many states have the naturally occurring mineral fluoride in their water already and I fear this is getting conflated when everything is being called “fluoride”.
Yes, there is “naturally occuring fluoride” but that is completely different than the fl added to the water systems. The fluoride added to our waters in the US is mainly hexafluorosilisicic acid.
http://www.enviro.ie/correspondence/Hexafluorosilicic%20Acid%20as%20an%20ingredident%20in%20Fluoridation%20of%20Drinking%20Water_WAUGH_2012.pdf
70% of the US is artifically fluoridated and they use hexafluorosisilic acid which is a byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer companies. It is from the wet scrubbers of the exhaust which are pollution control devices. They sell this toxic waste to the water companies. https://fluoridealert.org/?article=fluoridation-chemicals
Thanks for asking,
Barbara
I’m interested to read the actual scientific method to test IQ’s of newborns.
Hello Diane,
Here is just a taste of the 90 + studies. The link to the top studies the Judge reviewed is linked in his ruling https://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Court-Ruling.pdf In all my articles on fl I link the studies I site with the blue hyperlinks.
Thanks for wanting more information.
Barbara
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31743803/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31856837/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639015/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34101876/
https://www.jocpd.com/articles/10.17796/1053-4625-42.5.1
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35276192/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37798092/
Autism and Fl: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31527457/
Dementia and FL:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30544885/
Hi Barbara. Fascinating article- thank you! I am assuming that even bottled “nursery water” contains this same type of neurotoxic fluoride that is in tap water? My 22 year old son has no evidence of neorological disorders but does have enamel fluorosis, much like the photo provided in your article. Although I did nurse for 6 months, I used the bottled Dannon “nursery water” to mix formula, etc… thereafter. As a dental professional, then and now, it is appalling the lack of, or rather the deliberate with holding, of vital health information by the government and its entities!
Have you researched or are you recommending any other therapies or substances, other than fluoride, to combat the possibility of tooth decay?
Thanks again for the enlightenment!
Hello Wendy,
Thank you for your kind comments. I have looked at the Dannon Nursery bottle and do not see fluoride listed but I have sent the company an email to confirm that. As a profession, we have been greatly misleaded about the “benefits” of fluoride versus the many severe side effects. My other fluoride articles show it is far from safe, even at low doses. I am sorry to hear your son has fluorosis but he is not alone. 40% of America’s children do and that is an indication of deeper systemic issues. Tooth decay is not a lack of fluoride. It is absolutely a nutritional deficiency and a huge red alert for systemic issues. The body is taking the nutrients from the teeth to feed the bones. I have lots of information on that under my caries articles AND! in January I will be part of a group of hygienists hosting a course we are calling RDH BOOST where we will go into depth on what to do about caries. I am happy to Zoom with you and discuss this in more detail if you would like.
Hugs to you,
Barbara
What an engaging and thought-provoking article! Your balanced perspective on fluoride and its role in dental health is truly commendable. It’s refreshing to see such an informative discussion about a topic that often sparks debate. Keeping readers informed about both the benefits and concerns is essential for making educated decisions about oral care.
For those seeking expert advice on maintaining dental health, I recommend checking out our services: https://www.fhfd.ca/.