News: 0175147233

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

EPA Must Address Fluoridated Water's Risk To Children's IQs, US Judge Rules (reuters.com)

(Saturday September 28, 2024 @11:34AM (BeauHD) from the environmental-concerns dept.)


An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters:

> A federal judge in California has ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to strengthen regulations for fluoride in drinking water, saying the compound poses an [1]unreasonable potential risk to children at levels that are currently typical nationwide. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen in San Francisco on Tuesday [2]sided (PDF) with several advocacy groups, finding the current practice of adding fluoride to drinking water supplies to fight cavities [3]presented unreasonable risks for children's developing brains .

>

> Chen said the advocacy groups had established during a non-jury trial that fluoride posed an unreasonable risk of harm sufficient to require a regulatory response by the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act. "The scientific literature in the record provides a high level of certainty that a hazard is present; fluoride is associated with reduced IQ," wrote Chen, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama. But the judge stressed he was not concluding with certainty that fluoridated water endangered public health. [...] The EPA said it was reviewing the decision.

"The court's historic decision should help pave the way towards better and safer fluoride standards for all," Michael Connett, a lawyer for the advocacy groups, said in a statement on Wednesday.



[1] https://science.slashdot.org/story/24/08/22/2318215/fluoride-at-twice-the-recommended-limit-is-linked-to-lower-iq-in-kids

[2] https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/egpbozdqkvq/09252024fluoride.pdf

[3] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/epa-must-address-fluoridated-waters-risk-childrens-iqs-us-judge-rules-2024-09-25/



I never thought I'd read these words... (Score:5, Funny)

by VeryFluffyBunny ( 5037285 )

...in a peer-reviewed scientific paper:

> In the movie Dr. Strangelove, General Ripper claimed that water fluoridation was destroying “our precious bodily fluids”—a reference to the claim that water fluoridation was a conspiracy designed to weaken US willpower and make the country susceptible to a Communist takeover.

Link to paper: [1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov] =D

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504307/

Do Thyroid and Pineal gland function next ... (Score:2)

by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 )

The safety factors for impact on thyroid and pineal gland function are similarly pathetic or entirely absent depending on your point of view. With the anti-anti-science squad desperately trying to claim threshold effect as if that makes it all good.

Caries is a huge problem which in and of itself causes massive health problems downstream, at the population level probably well in excess of the little health damage of fluoridation ... but can we have an honest discussion about it, instead of first lying for th

Re: (Score:2)

by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

> The safety factors for impact on thyroid and pineal gland function are similarly pathetic or entirely absent depending on your point of view. With the anti-anti-science squad desperately trying to claim threshold effect as if that makes it all good.

> Caries is a huge problem which in and of itself causes massive health problems downstream, at the population level probably well in excess of the little health damage of fluoridation ... but can we have an honest discussion about it, instead of first lying for the greater good and then turning it into a witch hunt for the greater good? "You can't handle the truth" is not a good position for scientists to take IMO.

The effects of fluoride were discovered via people who lived in an area where the drinking water contained fluoride, and they had few cavities. If a demonstrable effect that fluoride made humans stupid, it seems that those same people would be remarkably and quantitatively of lower intelligence.

Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

by HiThere ( 15173 )

OK. But without fluoridating the water there are other approaches that work. Before I lived in an area with fluoridated water the dentists used to paint teeth with a fluoride paste. I forget how often that needed to be repeated.

Anyway, if there ARE problems with fluoride in the water, one can avoid systemic exposure and still get the benefits.

Re: (Score:3)

by evanh ( 627108 )

Yeah, people are eating toothpaste instead. That's just great, you've done well. Something not intended for eating is now eaten in quantity.

The fluoride fear mongering just come across as conspiracies.

Re: (Score:2)

by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

> OK. But without fluoridating the water there are other approaches that work. Before I lived in an area with fluoridated water the dentists used to paint teeth with a fluoride paste. I forget how often that needed to be repeated.

> Anyway, if there ARE problems with fluoride in the water, one can avoid systemic exposure and still get the benefits.

That is true. I use a fluoride paste at home - It is a casein based product with sodium fluoride. It also rebuilds enamel which helps to reduce sensitivity. Got it from my dentist. Well worth it.

Another possibility of a test is to measure the IQ of Americans who partake of fluoridated water with countries that have no fluoridation either through natural water, or medically administered. Those countries citizens should have a markedly higher average IQ.

This should be provable the same way as lead "consu

Re: (Score:2)

by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

You can't use IQ tests to make such comparisons, especially between countries. Even if IQ tests were a reliable measure of raw intelligence, which they clearly are not, there are too many other variables to attribute any difference to just one thing like fluoride.

The only way to prove fluoride has any effect on intelligence is to find the mechanism by which it affects development of the brain.

Re: (Score:2)

by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

> You can't use IQ tests to make such comparisons, especially between countries. Even if IQ tests were a reliable measure of raw intelligence, which they clearly are not, there are too many other variables to attribute any difference to just one thing like fluoride.

> The only way to prove fluoride has any effect on intelligence is to find the mechanism by which it affects development of the brain.

I don't know the right term for it. Possibly my being purposely obtuse to make a point, but I'm not disagreeing with anything you say.

I'm pretty certain that any measurable effect will be extremely tiny. As another poster noted, IQ tests can be quite ambiguous, and it is possible for the same person to get a different "IQ" on tests when retaking them.

One thing is for certain, we've been fluoridating water for many decades now, and the people drinking the naturally fluoridated water for even longer do

Re: (Score:2)

by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

The funny thing about IQ tests is that if people with an IQ of 150 really were super smart, they would realize that IQ tests are mostly bunk.

Re: Do Thyroid and Pineal gland function next ... (Score:2)

by hdyoung ( 5182939 )

There are tons of areas in the world where fluoride levels are known to be dangerously high in the drinking water and the effects have been studied. Cant post link right now. A 4 word google search will spit out a ton of links including real research papers.

Re: (Score:1)

by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 )

All my this. Science does and must allow the questioning of ANY orthodoxy, and there are large groups of people unwilling to question theirs which still pretend to base their beliefs on the scientific. As soon as you have faith in it, even if 'it" is the current scientific consensus, you're no longer practicing science.

WTF happened to us? (Score:2)

by Baron_Yam ( 643147 )

A long time ago, someone noticed that if there wasn't enough fluoride naturally present in the water, populations had drastically worse dental health so we started adding a bit where we found the levels deficient. Much like we discovered that if you don't have enough iodine in your diet you get goiters and other health issues, so we started iodizing salt.

I don't care if there's a tiny effect on average IQ when we add fluoride to our drinking water; I care if the impact is better or worse than the benefit

How do we decide? (Score:2)

by Bruce66423 ( 1678196 )

'I care if the impact is better or worse than the benefit to our dental health.'

What is the basis for our decision?

Re: How do we decide? (Score:1)

by writeRight ( 1444379 )

What is government authority to force medicate people? Maybe each person should make their own decision, rather than government mandate of chemicals in water supply.

Ground level truth (Score:2, Interesting)

by Okian Warrior ( 537106 )

> A long time ago, someone noticed that if there wasn't enough fluoride naturally present in the water, populations had drastically worse dental health so we started adding a bit where we found the levels deficient. Much like we discovered that if you don't have enough iodine in your diet you get goiters and other health issues, so we started iodizing salt.

> I don't care if there's a tiny effect on average IQ when we add fluoride to our drinking water; I care if the impact is better or worse than the benefit to our dental health.

Shouldn't you be caring about the strength of effects on overall mortality?

Why is dental health more important than IQ?

We know that IQ is responsible for about 40% of success in our society(*). I'd like to see figures that show rate conditionalized on having cavities.

Additionally, I was told once by a dentist that caries is transmitted from the parents, mother specifically by sharing food, to the newborn infant. In cases where the mother is careful and the infant doesn't get infected, the newborn's immune s

Re: Ground level truth (Score:2)

by Strider- ( 39683 )

> Why is dental health more important than IQ?

Dental health, and in particular poor dental lm has all sorts of knock on effects on other health. Heart health, mental health, general nutrition, and many many other things are tied to the condition of our teeth.

This is why Canada is in the process of rolling out public dental care.

Re: (Score:2)

by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 )

> Dental health, and in particular poor dental lm has all sorts of knock on effects on other health.

So does low IQ.

Re:WTF happened to us? (Score:5, Insightful)

by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

You know how to improve dental health even more? Universal healthcare including free trips to the dents every 6 months, rather than reserving that right to people with jobs where the benefits include a dental plan - a meme so common that Americans even poke fun at themselves in movies for it.

Re: (Score:1)

by ihavesaxwithcollies ( 10441708 )

Wrong, you keep increasing the levels of fluoride in water.

We can't have private corporations not being able to profit off the suffering of others.

U-S-A! U-S-A!

Re: (Score:2)

by WaffleMonster ( 969671 )

> A long time ago, someone noticed that if there wasn't enough fluoride naturally present in the water, populations had drastically worse dental health so we started adding a bit where we found the levels deficient. Much like we discovered that if you don't have enough iodine in your diet you get goiters and other health issues, so we started iodizing salt.

Half of the salt purchased isn't iodized. People have a choice.

"When weighted by sales volume in ounces or per item, 53% contained iodized salt."

[1]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]

> I don't care if there's a tiny effect on average IQ when we add fluoride to our drinking water

I do.

> I care if the impact is better or worse than the benefit to our dental health.

Those concerned about their dental health should try toothpaste and floss.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4377875/

Re: (Score:1)

by Baron_Yam ( 643147 )

> Those concerned about their dental health should try toothpaste and floss.

Insufficient - unless you use fluoridated toothpaste.

Re: (Score:2)

by WaffleMonster ( 969671 )

> Insufficient - unless you use fluoridated toothpaste.

What else would you use? Is there even such thing as non-fluoridated toothpaste? If so where can you buy it?

Re: (Score:2)

by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 )

Some research suggests very high percentage HAP toothpaste is as effective as fluoride.

Re: (Score:2)

by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

> A long time ago, someone noticed that if there wasn't enough fluoride naturally present in the water, populations had drastically worse dental health so we started adding a bit where we found the levels deficient. Much like we discovered that if you don't have enough iodine in your diet you get goiters and other health issues, so we started iodizing salt.

> I don't care if there's a tiny effect on average IQ when we add fluoride to our drinking water; I care if the impact is better or worse than the benefit to our dental health.

This - and if it has a detrimental effect on IQ, why didn't they observe that these people had great teeth, as well as being stupid?

Seems like a great study. A group of people whose children are raised without anf fluoride in their diets (gonna have to make certain there is none in their water source, and a group whose children had fluoridated water. In the end, the children who partook of fluoride should be much less intelligent as adults than those who had no fluoride at any time.

Re: (Score:2)

by WaffleMonster ( 969671 )

> This - and if it has a detrimental effect on IQ, why didn't they observe that these people had great teeth, as well as being stupid?

It is easier to see signals from population level dental health than measuring slight changes in intellect of a population.

> Seems like a great study. A group of people whose children are raised without anf fluoride in their diets (gonna have to make certain there is none in their water source, and a group whose children had fluoridated water. In the end, the children who partook of fluoride should be much less intelligent as adults than those who had no fluoride at any time.

I don't understand the basis of commentary such as "much less intelligent" my understanding is the observed variance is on the order of a few points basically in line with what you can expect from taking another IQ test. Who is talking about significant changes in IQ?

Re: (Score:2)

by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

>> This - and if it has a detrimental effect on IQ, why didn't they observe that these people had great teeth, as well as being stupid?

> It is easier to see signals from population level dental health than measuring slight changes in intellect of a population.

I don't disagree with you at all. But they claim that it makes people less intelligent.

Seems like a great study. A group of people whose children are raised without anf fluoride in their diets (gonna have to make certain there is none in their water source, and a group whose children had fluoridated water. In the end, the children who partook of fluoride should be much less intelligent as adults than those who had no fluoride at any time.

> I don't understand the basis of commentary such as "much less intelligent" my understanding is the observed variance is on the order of a few points basically in line with what you can expect from taking another IQ test. Who is talking about significant changes in IQ?

The people who will take this and run with it. They are anti-vaxxers,

Re: WTF happened to us? (Score:1)

by writeRight ( 1444379 )

"I don't care if there's a tiny effect on average IQ ...". Medicating our water supply is a barbaric method of drug delivery. Feminists may riot when they find out you are anti-choice. My body and it should be my choice.

Address it ehh? (Score:2)

by zendarva ( 8340223 )

"This is stupid and false, and while we're addressing it, we're not going to change our policies based on stupidity" There we go.

Re: (Score:2)

by HiThere ( 15173 )

Do we know that it's false? It could be a minor effect, or there could be a threshold. We do know that excess fluoridation causes teeth to become brittle (and unsightly). So there definitely SHOULD be limits. What they are ... well, that's less clear to me.

Re: (Score:1)

by zendarva ( 8340223 )

Yes mr sea lion. We know it's false.

Who drinks tap water these days (Score:2)

by rossdee ( 243626 )

Tap water is for washing, not drinking.

Buy distilled water, and add what minerals/nutrients you need.

Re: (Score:2)

by twms2h ( 473383 )

WTF? Many people drink tap water, at least in countries where it is safe to drink.

Re: (Score:1)

by data oyster ( 10309165 )

Good idea. I try to use at least a scoop of electrolyte mix daily. But, you may be trading one problem for another. For example, distilled water purchased in plastic bottles may contain plasticizer chemicals (phthalates, anti-oxidants, UV scavengers and other stabilizers. There are dozens. Not to mention, microplastics). Also, it is probably not distilled, just reverse osmosis water. Which involves forcing water through membranes with tiny holes. The membrane, too, is plastic. What else would it be

The frogs are out hopping in the pride parade (Score:2)

by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 )

Better get the EPA on that one too.

Hey, if it distracts them from banning automobiles and red meat (and you know they want to), I'm grudgingly in favor of this bullshit.

Let's get this straight... (Score:1)

by PsychoSlashDot ( 207849 )

A judge - inherently not an expert on health issues - is telling an agency that exists specifically to regulate dangerous substances that they need to regulate more?

You'd think the EPA would already be biased towards excess caution, because the more they regulate, the more they're seen to be "doing something". Like the way auditors always, always find something to justify their existence, it'd be odd for the EPA to be letting things slide... at least if there's actual science telling them they should reg

Re: (Score:2)

by mrfaithful ( 1212510 )

Most people will let sleeping dogs lie until forced otherwise. The EPA is not only *not* immune to politics (the real kind, not the red vs. blue kind) but exposed to them more than most and so even if they know there's something worth looking into, why would they spend their budget and their political capital in chasing it down when the harm might be mostly to them than the people who are currently slightly/moderately/severely over/under fluoridated? And not even for the organisation as a whole, if the org

Re: (Score:2)

by Pinky's Brain ( 1158667 )

This is because of the NIH study.

[1]https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/what... [nih.gov]

You don't need to be a scientist to recognize the scientific consensus just got shattered. Until the witch hunt can get the NIH scientists painted as perpetuating bad science, pretending there is an overwhelming consensus is plainly untenable.

There is a lot of similarity between this case and lab leak theory. In both cases there is an underlying "you can't handle the truth" motivation on part of a lot of scientists, which causes friction beca

[1] https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/completed/fluoride

Glad they're finally doing this (Score:2)

by Chelloveck ( 14643 )

Well, good. I'm glad that after 75 years of water fluoridation someone is finally looking at the health effects. You'd really think that maybe someone would have looked at it before but I guess they haven't. Go figure.

I mean, it's not like we have ready-made test and control groups. Say, kids and adults who've spend their entire lives drinking fluoridated water, and other kids and adults who've spent their entire lives in rural areas with private wells. If we had that we could just compare the two groups

You are blessed (Score:1)

by SneedFeedAndSeed ( 10502403 )

Turns out your country cares about your health more than you do, to the extent of gifting you magic water. On the contrary I don't get why they sell you boring water in a bottle tho

Wait ... is this a FUN THING or the END of LIFE in Petticoat Junction??