Category: Fluoride

  • Take My Water, Take My Life, and Pay No Price

    By JJ McElheney – January 13, 2025

    Dear Hope; (Hope Iglehart works in Senator Ossoff’s Office – D – GA)

    I was reading last night about the envirovictims of the California wildfires.  

    I could not believe what I was reading! 

    Wildfires burning football fields per minute, lack of water, insurance companies washing their hands in California, and handicapped people unable to evacuate, being left to die as their homes burned to the ground. 

    If true, this is apocalyptic.  

    When will this be properly addressed now by the authorities elected to run our federal government? 

    Here I am, Hope, back to Senator Ossoff, asking similar questions in Georgia:

    Who took our water and poisoned it?

    Why were they allowed to do it?

    Why were we not removed from the harm by EPA when we reported it 15 years ago?

    Did insurance companies pay our perpetrators? 

    Why has EPA not responded here and now?

    When will Senator Ossoff respond to these questions?

    His response couldn’t come soon enough given the catastrophic failures that certainly could have been prevented in Athens, GA. 

    Where is ATSDR? ( Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry)

    Where is GA EPD? (Environmental Product Declaration)

    Why have these environmental regulatory and health agencies gone dark?

    Is it homicide at this point that our water was deliberately poisoned and people died because of it?

    Who should be arrested and charged? 

    I look forward to hearing from Senator Ossoff soon. 

    EDITOR’s NOTE: Ms. McElheney is and has been fighting against fluoride in municipal water for the last 15 years. She raises valid questions.

  • Fluoride – Soon To Become Obsolete?

    Fluoride – Soon To Become Obsolete?

    Opinion and Commentary By Donna Westfall – November 16, 2024

    I received an email from my oldest daughter. She remembers the struggle we had in this community trying to get fluoride removed from our drinking water. It took two tries at the ballot box. We won the second time in 2012 and fluoride was turned off in 2013. She suggested I apply for a job with RFK, Jr.

    As much as I’ve learned about the harm of fluoride, I’m positive RFK, Jr. could run circles around me.

    But there have been hundreds if not thousands of people in our country also banging on the “fluoride is poison” drum. One such person is JJ McElheney. The woman is relentless. She has written to those in the fluoride arena for years trying to get it removed. Now that RFK, Jr. is entering the ring, she has thrown down the gauntlet to Senator John Ossoff (D -GA). Read this email dated November 15th:

    Dear Senator Ossoff,

    Thank you for reaching out yesterday!  

    I do appreciate my concerns about systemic violations of envirovictims, by agents in authority within the federal government, being taken seriously, and heading in the right direction, to finally be addressed. 

    Your response came yesterday on the cusp of the announcement that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, had been chosen to be the Trump Administration Health and Human Services Secretary (HHS):

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-expected-select-rfk-jr-lead-hhs-politico-reports-2024-11-14

    So here’s my challenge to you Senator Ossoff, to your reply yesterday.

    RFK, Jr called this week for the rebuilding of the Democratic Party.

    https://abc3340.com/amp/news/nation-world/rfk-jr-urges-total-rebuild-of-my-dads-beloved-democratic-party-robert-f-kennedy-jr-independent-presidential-candidate-health-policy-make-america-healthy-again-van-jones

    Can you start today by contacting Dr. Rachel Levine, HHS Head—before she exits the stage, and initiate a federal moratorium on water fluoridation?

    This can happen today as a legacy of the Biden Administration.  

    Please see attached letter written 10 years ago, during Obama Administration. 

    Or we can wait as a nation until 2025, as RFK, Jr is confirmed and takes his place in the HHS cabinet— giving the win to protect maternal/child health, to the Trump Administration. 

    Please let me know your history altering decision. 

    JJ McElheney
    micahsmission@aol.com

    Not included is her four page letter from 2014 to Dr. Wanda Jones, Assistant Secretary to HHS. If anyone is interested I’ll be happy to send you a copy.

  • Are The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and National Toxicology Program (NTP) Ignoring Fluoride Toxicity?

    Are The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and National Toxicology Program (NTP) Ignoring Fluoride Toxicity?

    By JJ McElheney – June 6, 2024

    Dear Dr. Wolfe,

    Please provide me with updates available on this subject matter that involves NIEHS/NTP.  

    It is important that NIEHS/NTP be transparent here and now with my inquiry, given the shocking bad faith uncovered with the fluoride neurotoxicity report.  

    I have asked previously for available updates of where fluoride endocrine disrupting and carcinogenic analyses are in the pipeline.  No answer.

    As you are aware, my personal time and energy has been extensively documented in efforts to generate this critical information to envirovictims. 

    Please be sensitive to the fact that we feel that the extraordinary measures taken to accommodate the dental industry to interfere and conceal the rigorous conclusions of the developmental neurotoxicity of fluoride, is abusive in nature and should have already been rectified to never occur again.   

    Has it?

    NIEHS/NTP has gone out of the way to feed adverse toxicology information to a third party dental trade group, while ignoring those of us who have been negatively impacted by fluoride in drinking water.  

    This is unacceptable and potential violation of protected rights to US citizens. 

    The removal of this real time major neurotoxic exposure pathway to pregnant people and their babies, should have been a priority already for federal agents with this internal knowledge.

    On the contrary, the harm remains.  

    Why has NIEHS/NTP punted to the dental industry to continue this abuse and perpetuate potential fraud, rather than vigorously act to remove this endangerment in a concerted interagency effort? 

    I look forward to hearing from you with this important updates. 

    Thank you, 

    JJ McElheney
    micahsmission@aol.com

    Editor’s Note: From Fluoride Action Network –

    Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976, a group of non-profits and individuals 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 rejected the petition. In response the groups sued the EPA in Federal Court in 2017. Evidence on fluoride’s neurotoxicity was heard by the Court in two phases: a 7-day trial in June 2020, and a 14-day trial in February 2024. As of May 2024, a judgment from the court has yet to be rendered.

    Official Court link: Food and Water Watch et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al.

  • UPDATE ON FLUORIDE LAWSUIT

    UPDATE ON FLUORIDE LAWSUIT

    By Carol Goodwin Blick – February 20, 2024

    Friends, just below, find FAN Executive Director Stuart Cooper’s update on what we can expect during final statements tomorrow, as well as some bad news. Carol / Clean Water Sonoma-Marin

    Closing statements from attorneys will take place on the final day of the TSCA/EPA Lawsuit this Tuesday, February 20th at 9:30 a.m. Pacific (12:30 Eastern).

    The judge has had time to watch deposition videos, look over evidence, and prepare a series of questions for attorneys.

    Both the plaintiffs (FAN) and the defendants (EPA) have approximately 40 minutes each for their remarks, though last week the judge said that he would like most of that time to be used to answer his questions, favoring a dialogue rather than presentations.

    Our legal team has also advised us that Tuesday’s proceedings will likely be very technical and focused on science and risk assessment.

    The hearing will be streamed live for the public on Zoom:

    Watch the Live Stream on Zoom
    https://cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1619911861…

    Webinar ID: 161 991 1861
    Password: 912881

    Join by Phone Phone: (669) 254-5252 or (646) 828-7666
    International numbers: https://cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com/u/advFLxrTkx

    Trial Recording
    Unfortunately, we have some bad news. We’ve just learned that the court changed its position on using the Cameras in the Courtroom program to record the second phase of the trial and post it publicly on their website. As of right now, the court no longer intends to share the recordings with the public. While we don’t know the exact reason for this ruling, I assume it was because the proceedings were live streamed on Zoom. The recording was originally suggested as an alternative to the live stream if that was not permitted by the federal court system, not in addition to it. Our legal team plans to discuss this situation with the judge on Tuesday as well

  • Update on Water Fluoridation Trial

    Update on Water Fluoridation Trial

    By Carol Goodwin Blick – February 12, 2024

    The Toxic Substances Control Act  (TSCA)/EPA water fluoridation bench trial is entering its
    last week. EPA’s expert witnesses will continue their testimony this
    morning, Monday February 12, and Tuesday February 13, 2024.

    Final arguments will be heard this Wednesday February 14th. The Court’s
    ruling will follow at a later date. If the ruling is in our favor,
    almost certainly EPA will appeal it.

    Many thanks to Jay Sanders, Education & Outreach Director for Fluoride Action Network (FAN), for
    explaining the limitations of a judgement in our favor, and the range of
    possible EPA responses to that judgement, should it lose an appeal:

    TSCA only applies to industrial chemicals. An “unreasonable risk”
    determination from the court will affect only artificial water
    fluoridation. It will NOT affect natural levels of fluoride in water.
    The Judge can not instruct the EPA to set a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL).

    Again, it’s a binary decision, yes or no, “is fluoridation an
    unreasonable risk?”

    If the answer is yes, EPA has seven different rule-making options that
    it could issue. The options are not mutually exclusive.

    The law authorizes EPA to issue regulations requiring one or more of the
    following actions to the extent necessary so that the chemical substance
    no longer presents an unreasonable risk:

    1. Prohibit or otherwise restrict manufacture, processing, or
    distribution in commerce;

    2. Prohibit or otherwise restrict for a particular use or above a set
    concentration;

    3. Require minimum warnings and instructions with respect to use,
    distribution in commerce, or disposal;

    4. Require recordkeeping or testing;

    5. Prohibit or regulate any manner or method of commercial use;

    6. Prohibit or regulate any manner or method of disposal;

    and/or

    7.  Direct manufacturers or processors to give notice of the
    unreasonable risk to distributors and replace or repurchase products if
    required.

    The trial is open to the public. Visitors are required to show an I.D.
    and follow the court’s safety protocols, including wearing masks.
    Public seating in the courtroom is limited and will be first-come,
    first-served.  Courtroom doors will open at 8:00 a.m. each morning.

    San Francisco Courthouse
    Courtroom 5 – 17th Floor
    450 Golden Gate Avenue
    San Francisco, CA 94102

    Live Stream on Zoom:
    https://cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1619911861?pwd=TjVma1lnMlJlNHR3ZE9QMkFjNkFndz09
    Webinar ID: 161 991 1861
    Password: 912881

    Join by Phone
    Phone: (669) 254-5252 or (646) 828-7666
    International numbers: https://cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com/u/advFLxrTkx

    Remember, final arguments are scheduled for 8:30 a.m. this Wednesday the
    14th.

    Carol Goodwin Blick is with Clean Water Sonoma

  • Rick North provides last minute EPA/TSCA trial update

    Rick North provides last minute EPA/TSCA trial update

    By Carol Goodwin Blick – January 30, 2024

    Friends, we needed this – not just updated dates, times, access codes,
    but an answer to the big question, the wording of the question the Court
    will rule on, yes or no. Many thanks to our long-time mentor, Rick North.

    If you wonder, who is Rick North?, I wondered the same years ago, at the
    beginning of our successful Clean Water Sonoma County campaign. Then
    Rick was a member of the volunteer steering committee keeping fluoride
    out of Portland, Oregon’s pristine water. I learned Rick was also a
    director at Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, after 21 year
    career at the American Cancer Society, including five years as excutive
    vice president of the Oregon chapter. Here’s a 2011 glimpse of Rick
    before the Clean Water Portland campaign:
    https://civileats.com/2011/01/03/faces-visions-of-the-food-movement-rick-north/

    Scroll down for Rick’s EPA/TSCA fluoridation trial update.

    UPDATE
    On 1/29/2024 1:34 PM, Rick North <hrnorth@hevanet.com> wrote:
    Re: Fluoridation on trial – an update

    Everyone (FAN advisory committee, FAN AEHSP board, FAN speakers bureau,
    Coalition to End Fluoridation, Moms vs. Fluoridation, Safe Water
    Spokane, Safe Water Calgary, Clean Water Oregon, Clean Water Newport,
    Safe Water Albany, other individual leaders)  –

    Here we go!

    Water fluoridation is on trial in federal district court in San
    Francisco (Food and Water Watch et al vs. Environmental Protection
    Agency), and will start this Wednesday, January 31.

    The court will rule – yes or no – on this question: Is fluoridation an
    unreasonable risk to human health?

    Lead attorney for our side Michael Connett had urged the judge to make
    the trial available to the public by Zoom, and he agreed. It’s available
    for viewing in its entirety. Just click on the first link and you can
    access it easily:

    https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges/chen-edward-m-emc/
    https://cand-uscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1619911861?pwd=TjVma1lnMlJlNHR3ZE9QMkFjNkFndz09

    Webinar ID: 161 991 1861
    Password: 912881

    The trial will be in session until February 14. We hope you can watch as
    much of it as your schedule allows and at least glimpse what is going
    on. The schedule is below. Ending times for all days may not be precise,
    depending upon the court’s discretion. Feb. 2, 5 and 9 may go
    significantly longer. All times are Pacific standard:

    Weds. Jan. 31   8:00 a.m  – 12:30 p.m
    Thurs., Feb. 1  8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Friday, Feb. 2  8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Mon. Feb. 5     8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Tues., Feb. 6   8:00 a.m. – 12.30 p.m.
    Weds., Feb. 7   8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Friday, Feb. 9  8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Mon., Feb. 12   8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
    Tues., Feb. 13  8:00 a.m. – Noon
    Weds., Feb. 14  8:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.

    To see FAN’s more detailed article and a timeline for the entire
    lawsuit, go to https://fluoridealert.org/articles/fluoride-on-trial/.

    I’ll be flying to San Francisco early tomorrow and stay the rest of this
    week to see this historic trial in person. If anyone needs to contact
    me, please call or text my cell phone at 503-706-0352. I’ll also be
    checking e-mail, but it will be sporadic.

    We’ll all be hoping for the best –

    Rick
    503-706-0352

    Carol Goodwin Blick is with Clean Water Sonoma Marin

  • Jan. 13: ‘Fluoride on trial’ Documentary Exposes 70 Years of Censored Science

    Jan. 13: ‘Fluoride on trial’ Documentary Exposes 70 Years of Censored Science

    Submitted By New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF) – January 12, 2024

    BIG PHARMA › NEWS In “Fluoride on Trial: The Censored Science on Fluoride and Your Health,” a new documentary airing on CHD.TV Saturday, Jan. 13, attorney Michael Connett and Children’s Health Defense’s Mary Holland expose the long history of government and industry suppression of scientific research revealing the toxic effects of fluoride, particularly on children. By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. 

     A new documentary airing Jan. 13 on CHD.TV exposes the long history of government and industry suppression of scientific research that reveals the toxic effects of fluoride, particularly on children. “Many people, when they think of fluoride, they think of shining white teeth and white-coated dentists,” said attorney Michael Connett. “It’s like American apple pie. It’s just considered such an essential part of our living today in the modern world.” 

    Connett and Children’s Health Defense President Mary Holland are featured in the new documentary, “Fluoride on Trial: The Censored Science on Fluoride and Your Health.” “What most people think of, when they think of fluoride, is ‘It’s good for your teeth,’” Holland said. But according to Connett, this widespread understanding is a consequence “of the federal health authorities not being open and not being honest with the public about what they were finding on fluoride toxicity.” 

    Contrary to popular belief, Connett said, fluoride’s primary mechanism for preventing tooth decay is through topical contact with the outside of tooth enamel, not by ingesting it — a fact acknowledged by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in deposition footage shown in the documentary. Decades of scientific research show that ingested fluoride has toxic effects on the human body and perhaps most importantly, that fluoride has neurotoxic effects on children. But the long history of government data suppression and censorship, combined with uninformed coverage by mainstream U.S. media, means that instead of having a science-based and reasoned debate, the public is presented with a caricature of the fluoride public health issue, according to Connett. 

    The media presents a false image of “settled science” supporting water fluoridation on one side and “crackpots who wear the tinfoil hats” who are concerned about fluoride on the other. “It’s a disservice to the public. It’s a disservice to the trade of journalism. And frankly, it’s sad to see,” Connett said. 

    The documentary seeks to set the record straight. Connett is the lead attorney in a lawsuit filed by Fluoride Action Network, Food & Water Watch and others against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), seeking an end to water fluoridation. In 2016, a group of six nonprofit organizations and several individuals petitioned the EPA to end fluoridation of drinking water in the U.S. based on evidence of health risks associated with fluoride, namely neurotoxicity. The EPA rejected the petition, leading Fluoride Action Network, Food & Water Watch and others to sue the EPA in 2017. The plaintiffs argued that water fluoridation violates the EPA’s Toxic Substances Control Act and that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ. The EPA denied water fluoridation causes harm. 

    The first phase of that trial took place in federal court in San Francisco in June 2020. However, the judge in the case put the proceedings on hold pending the release of the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) systematic review of research available on the neurotoxic effects of fluoride. The NTP is a federal research body within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It studied the neurotoxic effects of fluoride for seven years before issuing its draft report in 2022, consisting of a literature review and a monograph. 

     “The reports say that the evidence consistently associates fluoride exposure with reduced IQ [in children],” Connett told Holland. The draft was finally released under court order in March 2023, after top officials from HHS and CDC blocked the NTP from releasing it, according to emails obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests by the plaintiffs in the case. With the draft report available for review, the second phase of the trial is set to begin Jan. 31 in San Francisco. A ruling is expected early this year. The documentary shows a behind-the-scenes account of the political pressures that have been brought to bear — by HHS, the CDC, the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, the surgeon general’s office, the chief dental officer for the Public Health Service and by lobbying groups like the American Dental Association — to “weaken, delay or kill” the NTP report, the key document in the trial. Clips from depositions show the EPA’s own expert witnesses conceded that fluoride is a neurotoxicant. Yet, efforts to suppress the report continue. 

    Today, almost two years after the NTP scientists said the report was finalized, the final draft has still not been published. The film does a deep dive into the long history of suppression of the science on fluoride, beginning in the 1940s, when the Public Health Service was considering fluoridating water and studied potential health effects. The Public Health Service found that communities with high levels of fluoride in their water — higher than the proposed fluoridation rates — showed toxic effects from fluoride exposure including bone disease, cataracts and other issues. 

    Connett said: “It was clear that the Public Health Service approached this data not as something to inform the public with, but something that was potentially detrimental to their promotion of water fluoridation and not to be shared with anyone. And they adhered to that. … “And that was at the very beginning of this policy.” 

    The film shows fluoride’s little-known role in The Manhattan Project, where scientists needed both uranium and fluoride to build the bomb. Fluoride toxicology studies from that research, which often took the form of experiments performed on unknowing human subjects, were covered up. Scientists lied about their results and government policy blocked publications. “The early foundation upon which our fluoride safety standards are based, and which so much of our public understanding of fluoride is based, it was corrupted,” Connett said. And that laid the groundwork, he said, for today’s “cultural environment … where people [think] of fluoride as … really healthy.” 

    Holland asked Connett if there was any justification for keeping fluoride in the water today. Connett responded: “Your brain doesn’t need fluoride. Your thyroid gland doesn’t need fluoride. Your bones don’t need fluoride. The only part of your body that may benefit from fluoride are your teeth. And you can get the fluoride to your teeth through a very simple, elegant mechanism. You put it in toothpaste, you brush it on and you spit it out.” 

    Fluoride On Trial: The Censored Science on Fluoride and Your Health Broadcast starts tomorrow [1/13/24]at 8:00pm. We welcome relevant and respectful comments. Off-topic comments may be removed. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting. 

  • Update on the status of our federal lawsuit against the EPA

    Update on the status of our federal lawsuit against the EPA

    By Carol Boodwin Blick – September 20, 2023

    Friends, Fluoride Action Network (FAN) Director Stuart Cooper provides this update on the status
    of our federal EPA fluoridation lawsuit:

    1. We’re just over four months away from the January 29th, 2024 start
    date of the final phase of our federal lawsuit against the U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the neurotoxicity of
    fluoridation chemicals.

    The Court has scheduled two weeks to hear testimony and
    cross-examination of expert witnesses focused on new evidence and
    science published since the last trial dates in 2020, including the
    National Toxicology Program’s 6-year systematic review of fluoride’s
    effect on the developing brain. In the meantime, the final depositions
    are being conducted by FAN’s attorneys, and expert witnesses for both
    the plaintiffs and defendants have been selected and are currently
    preparing.

    The Court is expected to make a ruling following this final phase of the
    trial.

    2. Mark your calendars: we’re a month away from the next trial status
    hearing on Tuesday, October 17th, at 2:30 PM (Pacific) / 5:30 PM
    (Eastern). We’ll send out a reminder with the Zoom information as we get
    closer to the hearing.

    At the most recent status hearing held in July, very little was
    discussed, though the judge did ask attorneys an important question. He
    asked if they had a preference for whether the last phase of the trial
    should be held in person in the Federal Courthouse in San Francisco or
    virtually via Zoom like the first phase of the trial.

    An in person trial could create travel complications for some expert
    witnesses, increase costs substantially for both parties, and severely
    restrict the number of people able to watch the proceedings.

    Attorney Michael Connett, representing FAN, stated that we would prefer
    the trial be by Zoom to better accommodate international experts and to
    allow greater viewing access for the public. However, while attorneys
    for the EPA admitted that the Zoom format worked surprisingly well
    during the first phase of the trial, they stated–without
    explanation-–that their preference would be for an in person trial with
    limited public viewing.

    The judge shared FAN’s preference for a virtual trial and plans to
    proceed via Zoom unless otherwise directed by updates to the federal
    court system guidelines. This is another win for FAN, as well as for the
    public that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and EPA clearly don’t want
    watching the trial.

    3. The NTP report on fluoride’s developmental neurotoxicity has yet to
    be published and it’s unclear when or if it will actually be published.
    The date of its publication won’t impact the trial because the judge
    previously stated that he’s willing to move forward in January using the
    final unpublished version that is publicly available and was unanimously
    approved by the NTP’s Board of Scientific Counselors (BSC) in May.

    While the BSC recommended that the NTP publish the State of the Science
    report themselves and have a medical journal publish the meta-analysis
    as soon as possible, evidence obtained by FAN through the Freedom of
    Information Act indicates that the decision for final publication will
    likely be political rather than science-based and made by Assistant
    Secretary of Health, Dr. Rachel Levine, rather than the NTP Director,
    Dr. Rick Woychik.