Is This the End of Water Fluoridation in the US?

Does the recent trial mean the end of water fluoridation in the US? Time will tell. But what is certain is that nothing would have happened without citizens getting together and getting active.

Co-founder of the Freedom Cell Network and The Greater Reset, Derrick Broze has been an activist against water fluoridation for many years. As a freelance investigative journalist, documentary filmmaker, author, and public speaker he seeks to expose corruption and find solutions to problems affecting humanity. To learn more about his work please visit his website, the Conscious Resistance Network and read his articles on The Last American Vagabond. 

During Better Way Today on 18 March 2024 World Council for Health (WCH) Steering Committee member Emma Sron asked Derrick for an update on a recent United States Federal Court trial on water fluoridation in the USA.

A long-term interest in fluoride

Over a decade ago, while living in Texas, Derrick helped to establish the group Fluoride Free Houston. They set out to educate City Council members in an attempt to end water fluoridation, which costs the city a million dollars a year, which is paid for by citizens. Ironically, as Derrick pointed out, “paying for your water directly pays to put poison in the water in Houston.”

Water fluoridation is widespread across the USA, but this is not the case in all other countries. While an estimated 70% of US residents receive fluoridated water, only about 14% of people in the United Kingdom do, and many European countries have rejected fluoridation. 

What’s the problem with fluoride?

For those interested in the nefarious history of water fluoridation, Derrick recommends the book, The Fluoride Deception. There are many forms of fluoride but all of them, whether naturally occurring or not, have been associated with negative impacts on human health, including thyroid, kidney, and neurological issues, as well as brittle bones. One form of fluoride is fluorosilicic acid, a byproduct of aluminium and phosphate processing. About 80 years ago, this hazardous waste product started to be added to drinking water in the USA, despite evidence of its toxicity. 

Edward Bernays, author of the 1928 book Propaganda, was known as ‘the father of public relations’. In the late 1940s Bernays was hired by the Aluminum Company of America and worked with the American Dental Association to craft a programme that maintained that fluoride is good for your teeth. They came up with studies saying that children in rural areas with poor dental health who couldn't afford proper dental care would benefit from fluoride in the water. This is how water fluoridation started, and it continued expanding as government scientists claimed it was beneficial. Bernays boasted that, “Selling fluoride was child’s play!”

While whistleblowers at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and elsewhere have raised the alarm over the past 80 years, it was only in 2024 that the matter was finally heard in Federal Court in San Francisco, with expert scientists presenting data that has been known for years in an attempt to get fluoride declared a neurotoxin and to ban water fluoridation in the US. 

At the time of writing, the Court has not yet made its decision.

US Fluoride Trial update

This historic fluoride trial is the result of a process that began in 2016, when citizen groups including the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Food and Water Watch, Moms Against Fluoridation, and some individual plaintiffs filed a petition with the EPA, under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (TSCA). The EPA responded by rejecting their petition. Fortunately, however, they did so in such a way that it enabled the plaintiffs to file a lawsuit against the EPA for wrongful rejection of their petition. 

The case was originally brought before Judge Edward Chen in the San Francisco Federal Court in 2020. Derrick has followed the trial since then and speaks highly of the judge’s neutrality and lack of bias.

This lawsuit is historic in various ways: 

• No citizen's petition under TSCA had ever made it to a federal court before.

• It was the first time that a case against fluoride had been heard in federal court.

• The judge had been required to become familiar with the science of health risks relating to fluoride in order to determine if the EPA had correctly denied the petition. 

If the judge rules in favour of the plaintiffs, this will force the EPA to act under TSCA. Two of six options apply: firstly, to ban fluoride outright, which is what the plaintiffs are hoping for; or secondly, to further lower the recommended safe limit (below the current 0.7 milligrams per litre). 

In Summer 2020, influenced by EPA lawyers, Judge Chen decided to put the trial on hold until the release of a study by the US Government's National Toxicology Program (NTP), which would inform his decision. By 2024, however, the final version of the NTP study had still not been released. 

This is where things get interesting!

Thanks to the existence of the lawsuit, attorneys for the plaintiffs were able to request various documents under discovery, including emails from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). These emails revealed that: 

• The NTP scientists had been reviewing fluoride studies from around the world.

• The scientists were ready to publish the report in May 2022, but Assistant Secretary of Health, Rachel Levine, and staff of the CDC’s Oral Health Division blocked its release. 

The May 2022 version of the NTP report was released under discovery and revealed that the NTP scientists had found that higher fluoride exposure is associated with lower IQ in children. The report specifically mentioned the impact of prenatal exposure on neurodevelopment in the foetus. 

Discovery also revealed that the peer review process had been severely compromised. The anonymous reviewers had attempted on numerous occasions to get the NTP scientists to downplay their conclusions or to add certain caveats, but the scientists were confident about their findings and had pushed back. 

Judge Chen allowed the 2022 NTP report into evidence. He chose to focus on the science (which supports the arguments of the plaintiffs) but did not allow any discussion of behind-the-scenes political manipulation. While this is unfortunate, it may make it less likely for the EPA to derail the case on a point of politics. 

Another factor that has made this lawsuit historic is that the EPA attorney and expert witnesses had to admit under oath (which was entered into the court record) that higher levels of fluoride lead to neurodevelopmental issues!

Hoping for the best!

On the final day of proceedings, when closing arguments were being made, it appeared to Derrick that the judge was leaning towards finding that fluoride is a neurotoxin. However, it is not possible to anticipate the judgement. While it has been noted that fluoride can be harmful, there is uncertainty as to ‘safe’ levels. FAN’s lead attorney argued that, just as we now know that there is no safe level of lead, the same may apply to fluoride. 

The outcome of the trial may be affected by whether or not the judge wants to make such a significant ruling. The EPA will most probably appeal if they lose the case. And even if they don't, it could take years for action to be taken as the EPA is likely to find ways to slow the process down, with no concern for those exposed to this toxic substance in the meantime.

So, will this trial mean the end of water fluoridation in the USA? Time will tell. But what is certain is that nothing would have happened without citizens getting together, raising awareness, and engaging decision-makers. 

And whatever happens in the USA, Derrick warns that there are plans to expand fluoridation in the UK and Canada. Recognising that it is much more difficult to cancel a fluoridation programme once it is in place than to prevent it from happening, Derrick invites people to adopt the ‘Fluoride Free’ title and start raising awareness of this threat in their communities. It’s a tough process but, as he says, you need to “be consistent, be persistent, and be prepared for a long haul.”

Useful Resources

If you are looking for more information, Derrick recommend the following sources:

• Derek has a number of articles about the Fluoride Trial on The Last American Vagabond. This includes an article including video interviews with three of FAN’s expert witnesses who discuss the impact of fluoride in the mother’s drinking water on the development of both the skeleton and the brain of the foetus; the role of fluoride in hypothyroidism; and research from the 1930s that showed that fluoride caused brittle bones and affected brain function. One of the scientists also describes how the ‘fluoride lobby’ interfered with research he conducted at both Harvard University and for the World Health Organization (WHO).

• The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has an excellent website that includes what may be the world's largest database on fluoride studies. 

• The fluoride lawsuit’s website has information on all the studies referenced in the trial. 

• A review commissioned by Health Canada, which they refused to release, has been published independently by the scientists in the peer-reviewed journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology.

• The Lotus Study in the UK showed that fluoride does not significantly reduce cavities. 

If you missed this intriguing interview, it’s really worthwhile watching the whole recording here. It provides not only valuable background to the issue, but also encouraging stories of communities working together to create a Better Way – in this case by mobilising for the right to drink clean water.

---

If you find value in this Substack and have the means, please consider making a contribution to support the World Council for Health. Thank you.